vnto them Nay were they not therefore wholy to be separated from and left to the iudgement of God Num. 16. which ouertooke them and all that ioyned vnto them Yet was their error onely in matters of order and outward gouernement of the Church This may suffize to conuince the aduersaries vntrue assertions in this place To that of Maister Cranmer and Ridley c. is answered before For conclusion therefore this we adde concerning this poinct That all such assemblies and people as holde professe and practise as doth the Church of England these abominations following They can not by the word of God be esteemed in such estate trulie to holde Christ their Prophet Priest and King Towit The confusion of all sortes of people though neuer so wicked and their seed in the body of the Church The offices and callings of other Archb. and Lordb. then Iesus Christ also of Archdeacons Chancellors Commissaries Officials Priestes halfe Priestes Parsons Vicars Vagrant and Mercinarie Preachers c. The entrance into the Ministerie by an other way and by other Lord then Iesus Christ The executing of it vnder those strange Lords leauing it at their pleasure The preaching of the word administration of the Sacramentes and gouerning of the Church by vertue of the offices and callings afore said according to the Popish Canons and constitutions The power of Excommunication in the Prelates alone and their Officialls The confounding of Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall offices and authoritie in the Ministers of the Church The forbidding of Mariage at certen seasons The imposing and vsing of stinted deuised Liturgies The English Portuis taken out of the Popes latine word for worde saue that a fewe of the grosest thinges are left out yet keeping the same frame and order of Collectes Psalmes Lessons Pater nosters Pistles Gospels Versicles Respondes c. Appointing holy dayes to all Sainctes and Angels to the Virgin Marie Iohn Baptist Marke Luke and twelue Apostles seuerallie togeather with Fastes on the Eaues and on Ember dayes Fridayes Satterdayes Lent Prescribing the Ministers to pray ouer the dead ouer the Corne and Grasse at some seasons of the yeere and ouer Women at their Courching or purification Ioyninge them also to marie with the Ring which they make a sacramentall signe And to Baptise likewise with the signe of the Crosse with Godfathers and Godmothers with questions demanded of the infant that can not speake nor vnderstande Giuing power to Women to baptise And ordeyning that the other Sacrament of the Lords Supper be celebrated kneeling as when they receyue their maker and with change of the wordes of Christes institution taking in steed of them the wordes of the Popes Masse booke translated into English c. Finallie the vpholding of these and all such amongst them onely by carnall weapons of imprisonment death confiscation of goods banishment and such like The assemblies I say and people which holde professe and practize as doeth this Church of Englande the abominations afore said concerning the outward order and gouernement of the Church what soeuer truethes they holde besides yet can they not by the word of God be deemed truely to hold the Lord Iesus their Prophet Priest and King in such constitution of a church Neither therefore can they in this estate by the word of God be accounted true Christians nor the true constituted churches of Christ this is the question betweene vs and our aduersaries 7. Lastlie let the godlie and indifferent Reader iudge whether it will not followe vppon this answere in this place First that the a Contrarie to 1. Tim. 3.15 2. Tim. 3.16 Deut. 12.32 1. Corin. 4.6 Reu. 22.18 19 Scriptures are not sufficient for the building vp and guidance of the Church here on earth Secondlie that the b Contrarie to the 2. Tim. 3.17 with 1. Tim. 3.15 Pro. 2.1.9 Psal 119.105.13 men of God can not by the Scriptures be made absolute and fullie furnished to euery good worke Thidlie that c Contrarie to Col. 2.3 Heb. 3.1 2 3. Esay 32.22 Ephe. 4.11.12.13 1. Cor. 11. and 12. and 14. Rom. 12.3 4 5 6 7 8. Mat. 28.20.1 Tim. 6.13 14. Christ him selfe in whom the treasures of wisedome and knowledge are hid yet was so foolishe carelesse and vnfaithfull as hauing an house and kingdome which is his Church he hath not in his word appointed vnto it anie offices lawes and orders for the due gouerning and ordering thereof Finallie That the d Contrarie to the 2. Cor. 6.14 15 16. Psal 94.20 119.21.113.128 Reu. 9.1 2 3 and 14.9 10 11. Hierarchie Worship Sacramentes Traditions Canons and whatsoeuer constitutions of Antichrist concerning the outward orders and gouernement of the church being appointed by the Church and Magistrate are to be accounted Christes owne ordinances O shameles impietie Doubtles this is that same strange passion and meere desperatnes wherewith afterwarde vniustlie they charge vs which we will not prosecute as it deserueth but exhort them onely to take heede least that woe come vppon them whiche is written Woe vnto them that speake good of euill and euill of good which put darknes for light and light for darknes that put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter Woe vnto them that are wise in their owne eyes and prudent in their owne sight Esa 5.20.21 H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 2. Except IN this your defence of your secōd Exception it pitieth me to see your extreame folly which is the more miserable because it appeareth to be not of weaknes but of wilfulnes You would know of vs if we hold Christ to be our Prophet Priest and King and if we professe to obey him in his own ordinances and in no other I answered we doe constantly prosesse so and as we professe so wee practise But to make our profession practize in this poinct more manifest I noted how our stare meaneth Christ to be our Prophet Priest and King and how hee is to be obeyed viz. That the written word ought of necessitie to shew vs our inward and meare spirituall beleif obedience As for the outward Church order our state holdeth that it is arbitrary to bee appoincted and abrogated againe at the liking of the Church and Magistrate And that the worde no where forbiddeth this libertie Where note in this explication two thinges First it is foule wrong to our Churches and to my wordes to say as you doe That they meane no outward orders at all be matters of faith or constant in the Scriptures Nay it was neuer doubted but to preach to pray to administer Sacraments c. though externall yet are perpetuall things and necessarie and vnchangable by the Scriptures My expresse wordes and our Churches meaning is That any reasonable kinde of Church gouernement and rites and orders are arbitrary and changeable no matters of faith nor written in the Scriptures And yet still Christ to be our only and absolute King Prophet neuerthelesse Whosoeuer doth
theirs did not And that I trust is sound Which thing also you might haue remembred if you had ben so charitable by that which I wrote in “ In the next treatise following of the cōparison of the Ministery with Mariage Ans to your first Reason another place Then in your first answer Pag. 14. Howe vainely doe yow aske vs for Scriptures to proue those orders seing I expresly called them errors The like in your Second wher you load vp Scriptures to disproue thē Also Thirdlie you charge an vnconscionable vntruth on mee if you meane this answere vnto me that I should graunt and cannot deny that all outward ceremonies and gouernement are arbitrary at mans pleasure I onelie said that our state holdeth that generall opinion Not that I my selfe held it If you meane them write to them and speake to them if you meane me you doe me foule iniurie Fourthly whether they are Popish shiftes or no let our state which mainteyneth these things answer you Your Fift is answered in the first poinct of my explication noted before pag. 19. To your Sixt in pag. 16. wee aunswered before in the Second poinct of my explication pag. 19. Your Seuenth in pag. 18. is also against the state of our Church and not against me Maister IOHNSONS 3. Exception against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same EXCEPTION 3. THirdlie let them shew by the Scriptures howe the 36. Article of their doctrine booke alleadged agreeth with the Gospell of Christ and true Christianitie The words of the Article are these as followeth The Booke of consecrating of Archbishops and Bishops and ordering of Priestes and Deacons doth conteyne all thinges necessarie to such consecration and ordering neyther hath it any thing that of it selfe is superstitious or vngodly And therefore whosoeuer are consecrated or ordered according to the Rytes of that booke we decree all such to be rightly orderly and lawfully consecrated and ordered Moreouer how it agreeth with the Gospell and true Christianitie That Apocripha bookes and the booke of Homilies be read in the church by the Ministers diligentlie and distinctlie As is in Art 6. and 35. of that doctrine and booke aforesaid H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 3. Excep YOur third Exception is this That the 36. Article of ordaining Bishops Priests and Deacons Also the reading of Apocripha bookes and Homelies in the Church agree not with true Christianitie Ergo the Assumption aboue is false that is the whole doctrine of that booke of Articles is not sufficient to make vs true Christians I answer you should haue said those poincts destroy vtterly true Christianity Ergo c. Else the Argument followeth not But then we deny flatly the Antecedent or first part of the reason But your Reason you will say shall goe as you haue put it Then marke these reasons euen as good as yours and all one An Ethiopian is white of his teeth therefore he is a white man A Swanne is black of his bill therefore a Swanne is black My brother hath an eye of glasse or he hath a wodden legge therfore my brother is no true man F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 3. Excep OVr third Exception was this Whereas they referred vs to their booke of Artieles 1562. were quired that they should shew by the Scriptures how the 36. Article there mentioned which is of the booke of consecrating Archbiships and Bishops and of ordeyning Priests and Deacons And howe also the 6. and 35. Articles of that booke enioyning the Apocripha bookes and Homilies to bee read in the Church by the Ministers distinctlie and diligentlie Howe these J say doe agree with the Gospell of Christ and true Christianitis Now I pray you haue they shewed vs these things by the Scriptures as we desired nothing lesse First therefore marke this heere and euerie where also in their reasons and answeres that though wee call neuer so much to them for proofe and euidence from the Scriptures yet they neuer bring it but labour to put it off with other shiftes deuices of their owne As if our consciences were to be built vpon their fancies and not vppon the written worde of God But what doe they say to our demaund First they tell vs These thinges doe not vtterly destroy true Christianitie Secondly they graunt notwithstanding that they agree with it as blacke doeth with white that is they are cleane contrarie vnto it For this their similitudes doe import Nowe whereas they alleadge That these thinges destroy not true Christianitie We answere That euen that Hyerarchie worship constitution and gouernement which they professe and practize as appeareth by those and other their Articles and iniunctions in our former answere alleadged to which yet we haue receyued no aunswere being directly Antichristian doe * Nota vtterlie destroy true Christianitie so as the people and Churches so professing and practizing can not in that estate by the worde of God be iudged true Christians or the true constituted Churches of Christ. And touchinge the similitudes here vsed besides that which we haue noted before we adde moreouer that they are not against vs but against them selues in asmuch as comparing the doctrines of the Gospell which they professe with the whitenes of an Aethiopians teeth And their Antichristian Ministerie Worshop courtes and confusion of people with the blackenes of an Aethiopians body This and such like similitudes doe fitlie declare their estate And the approouing of the black constitution of their church Assemblies by some white doctrines of the Gospell which they professe Is euen as if they should reason thus An Aethiopian is white of his teeth therefore he is a white man A blacke Rauen is white of his bill Therefore a blacke Rauen is a white bird H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 3. Exception YOur Third Exception is That the 16. Article of cōsecrating Bishops Priests and the 6. and 35. Artic of Apocripha and Homelies doe not agree with the Gospel What then Ergo our Churches profession and practize differ Most false For our Churches doe professe that these things doe agree with Gospell well enough Also their practise is thereafter Or doe you conclude Ergo our Churches holde not Christ to saluation In deede so I tooke your purpose at the first but nowe in plaine categoricall termes you auouch it That these things being directlie Antichristian doe vtterlie destroy true Christianitie So then Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. were verie Antichristes and no true Christians As before also I trowe you affirmed Surely this grosse and wicked absurditie I could not open better then by this similitude This man hath a wodden legge an eye of glasse his nose deformed adde if you will both his armes not naturall but framed to him of wood or what you will Ergo this is no true man Yes Sir for all this he is a true man For as much as all this concernes not the verie life and being of a man though
he sayth We sinned against the Third commaundement in the application of the scriptures aforesaid That is their owne common custome and lamentable sinne to breake the Third commaundement in taking the name of God in vaine not onely by falsifying and peruerting the scriptures but also by their Ministration of the Word Sacramentes and Gouernment of the Church by vertue of such offices and callings as Christ neuer appointed in his worde therevnto but were first deuised and still are reteyned by Antichrist that sonne of perdition Hitherto of his answere concerning the proofe of our Proposition To the proofe of our Assumption he “ Marke this his sounde and Scholerlike dâ—alinge in this place and afterwards answereth not a worde which yet most of all required answere if he would in deede soundlie defende their estate as he pretendeth That their profession and practise ioyneth Christ Antichrist togeather we shewed in pag. 28 c. by their Articles Canons Iniunctions Aduertisements c. published at sundry times by their present Ministerie Worship and Church-gouernement according therevnto If this be not so why bringes he not warraunt for these particulers from the Testament of Christ and so take away the proofe of our Asumption Jf this be so as by his silence he graunteth and wee are sure he cannot shew the contrarie by the Scriptures then our Assumption standeth firme and consequently in this constitution they cannot be accounted true Christians nor their Assemblies so gathered true constituted Churches H. JACOB his 2. Reply vnto the 1. Reason 1 IN this your defence of your first Reason you would first of all fasten on me a contradiction for gráunting that our Church corruptions are from Antichrist which against your Second Exception J said wee holde to be Christs owne viz. Because we hold Christ hath giuen his Church that libertie to deuise them Alas it pittieth mee to see your simplicitie or it greueth me for your malice who could not see that there I spake in the person of our whole Church and state See Pag. 12. 18. 19. and shewed what they held And here I speake as I thought my selfe This is a silly contradiction 2. Then you say Pag. 25. I dazell the peoples eyes in saying some outward orders and ceremoines are from Antichrist as if they were but a few and of small moment Therefore you are content to recken them vp full tediously God knoweth euen 91. in number numero Deus impare gaudet And what of all these will you saye therefore That whosoeuer holdeth these cannot holde Christ vnto saluation And so Mr. Cranmer and the rest of the Martirs were damned But if not Then I saye againe These some these 91. are too few and too slight and of too small momeÌ„t of them selues and of their owne nature to abolishe vs from Christ This ought you to haue proued which you neuer doe but still your speech is most false and not vnproper onely that wee ioyne Christ and Antichrist togeather As in the maimed maÌ„ before * Pag. 25. noted there is not life death ioyned togeather but liuing things and dead things are and yet the man aliue and a true man 3. Then “ 2 cor 14. c Eze. 43.8 â— King 17.33 34 40 41. you will iustify your applying the scriptures which I said were mismatched were meant against the Idolatry of the First commandment not against the Idolatry of the Second only and meerelie as our Church orders in question are Therefore these scriptures cannot inferre any abolishing from Christ by simple holding of the corruptions in our Church which they doe proue by the simple holding of those Heathenish Idolatries whereof they speake To this you reply in Foure points 1 Jf these places bee meant of Heathenish Idolatry which could neuer stand with Gods truth togeather Yet they forbid all other corruptions against the Second commaundement also That I neuer denyed to be true after a sort These places indeed doe forbid the breach of the Second coÌ„maundement but not principally directly and of purpose nor in that measure or fulnes But their immediat purpose is against the Heathenish Idolatry breaking the First commaundement So that they forbid the breach of the Second commaundemeÌ„t consequently and proportionatly but not in that full manner as they doe the First They forbid the First so as that they shew there is no communion with God whilst men ioyne in such Idolaty they simply forbid the Second but deny not al communion with God to whom soeuer erreth therein 2 To your SecoÌ„d Reply I say make much of it for my parte I neuer thought other but our church corruptions are against the Second commaundement your second scripture here applied is of Saul I. Sam. 1â— a presumptuous and wilfull offendour if you make our whole Churches so your sinne is the greater 3 Thirdlie if you meane anie of Antichristes Idolatrie and false worship and namelie this in question the outward corrupt orders and ceremonies onely and no more doeth abolish vs from Christ and that this can not stande togeather with true faith like as the Pagans idolatrie against the First commaundement can not Then I denie it vtterlie you haue no proofe in the world for it And this inwrappeth Master Cranmer Ridley c. in the same course Your excuse here pag. 29. That Cranmer Ridley c. forsooke all the corruptions they sawe This belongeth to manie Thousands in England nowe no lesse then to them yea surelie there are infinite that knowe not so much of the corruptions as those learned men did which yet are not ignoraunt of redemption by Christ c. Yea your selfe Maister Iohnson though a man of learning yea knowing our corruptions and misliking them a long time before you forsooke vs yet I thinke you stood not abolished from Christ all that while I pray bee so good to poore men as you may yea to vs nowe also aswell as to your selfe and them in those times Where you say pag. 29. That since that time we are conuicted by the scriptures If you meane some fewe that here and there you could pick out and doe sinne still speake to them threaten them throwe out your damnatorie sentence against them But smite not all whosoeuer comes neare you Beware howe you iudge least you be iudged The heart belongeth to God therefore censure not euerie mans conscience too hastilie 4 Fourthlie you would prooue in your Third Exception before noted pag. 29. That both the breach of the First commaundement and of the Second also is forbidden I haue tolde you before pag. 32 33. howe it is true and howe not Nothing at all to serue your turne That which you say pag. 30. touching your first scripture 2. Cor. 6.14 2 Cor. 6.14 c. in that sence and maner as I suide is true and not otherwise That which of your Second scripture Ezek. 43.8 pag. ibid. you say Ezek. 43. â— Who seeth not but it speaketh
present Gouernours and then doubtlesse it was lawe And though Zachary Elizabeth Symeon Anna Mary Ioseph Christ and his Apostles did not actuallie ioyne in these corruptions yet they were generall no doubt and by lawe neuer the lesse and a number of the Iewes simply vsed them yet fell not from God as †The Sixe waterpots of the Iewishe purifyings Iohn 2.6 Therefore your Replies here are most vaine and false Lastlie in pag. 37. you will not confesse your contrarietie that is to saye betweene this your Second Reason and certen wordes in your Sixt Reason But the greater is your sinne to doe euill and defende it too Here in this Reason pag. 35. you would haue this scripture Mat. 15. to be meant against such vaine worshippers that they become heereby no true Church Or els what doe you vrge it against vs But in your Sixt Reason following you say That the Iewes euen nowe when these words were applyed to them were the true worshippers of God Are not these contrarie I pray you then reconcile them Maister IOHNSONS III. Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON III. IF the whole doctrine as it is publiquely professed and practized by law in Englande be not sufficient to make a Galatian a true Christian that should with all submit vnto Circumcision Then much lesse is it able to make him a true Christian that togeather with it submitteth vnto a false Ministerie Worship and Gouernement of the Church deuised by man euen the man of sinne But the first is true Therefore also the latter The consequence of the Proposition is good because Circumcision was once the holy ordinance and appointment of God himselfe to his Church and people whereas the Ministerie worship and gouernement aforesaid neuer was so but is mans deuice in religion euen Antichrist that capitall enemie of Iesus Christ. The Assumption is proued Gal. 5.2.3.4 where the Apostle speaketh of them that helde not onely such truethes of the Gospell as are in that booke of Articles but more then those Yet if they should with all submitt vnto circumcision he sayth they were abolished from Christ Christ would prosit them nothing H. IACOB his I. Reply to the 3. Reason THis your Third Reason is from the more to the lesse negatiuelie to this effect A Galatian vsing Circumcision is a likelier Christian then one of our English holding the Hierarchy and other traditions But A Galatian is a false Christian Ergo An English professor is much more We answer We denie the Assumption Galatians were then true Christians and their Assemblies true Churches Gal. 1.2 Therefore this Reason is nought If he obiect The Apostle saith such are abolished from Christ That is in deed some amongst them as helde Moses ceremonies necessarie absolutelie to saluation as Act. 15.1 And that †Gal. 5.3.4.5 Rom. 10.3.4 iustification was by the morall workes of the law Nowe the Churches of Galatia generallie were not such but held the sauing faith sound doubtles though manie amongest them were tainted with that infection by reason of some mischeuous teachers that were crept in and too well interteyned among them Howbeit with the Church Communion was kept And therefore so with vs you ought to deale If you say we are worse Christians then those grofest Galatians It is vtterlie false proue it if you can and it must drawe in Maister Cranmer c. with vs also If you say there are manie amongst vs as bad or worse then those worst Galatians you may say it but proue it you cannot Also if it were so yet this disagraceth it destroyeth not the Church like as hath bin said of the Galatians F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 3. Reason TO this our Third Reason His First answer is That he denyeth the Assumption which is asmuch in plaine termes as if he had giuen the holy Ghost the lye who by the Apostle Paule affirmeth it Gal. 5.2 3 4. As in the proofe of the Assumption we shewed before But for the more euidence of the trueth we will set downe the proofe of the Assumption in a Sillogisme thus If a Galatian submitt to Circumcision though he hold all the truthes of the Gospell professed in England withall yet be notwithstandinge abolished from Christ and falne from grace Then is he not in this estate a true Christian. But the former is true as the Apostle testifieth Gal. 5.2 3 4. Therefore also the latter Next he answereth That the Galatians were then true Christians and their Assemblies Churches Gal. 1.3 Therefore sayeth he this reason is nought But he may not thus runne away with the matter and deceyue himselfe and his simple fauourers The question is not whether anie Galatians were true Christians or any of their Assemblies true churches For who euer doubted of that But this is the question Whether a Galatian holding all the truethes of the Gospell nowe professed in Englande and withall submit to Circumcision were in that estate a true christian Or putting the case that there were whole Assemblies consisting of such Whether those assemblies then in that case were by Gods worde to be deemed the true churches of Christ. The Apostle testifieth and saith no This man saith yea Nowe whether of these two we shall beleeue let all men iudge But what is it then that the Apostle termeth the assemblies of the Galatians true churches Gal. 1.2 This man sheweth the reason him selfe the light of the trueth is so cleare and manifest There were but some of the Galatians sayth he that were infected with this error of Circumcision True in deed say we of such onely is the suppositiō made in the case afore said But the churches of Galatia sayth he generally were not such but held the sauing faith sound which also is most true they being set in the way and order of Christ Iesus and therefore though there sprang vp some heretikes and schismatikes amongest them which is the “ 1 Cor. 11.19 Actes 20.30 lott and triall of the true churches of God in all ages yet was there not cause to breake the Communion with those assemblies but to proceed with them in the faith and order of Christ and to * Gal. 5.12 1 Cor. 5.7 11 13. cutt off and cast out such troublesome leauen from amongst thē Now this being duely weighed it is nothing for but altogeather against the hauing of communion with the assemblies of this Lande which are not set in the way and order of Iesus Christ as were those churches of Galatia but in the Apostasie and confusion of Antichrist as hath ben at large declared before in the defence of the former Reasons where also that of Maister Cranmer Ridley c. is answered H. IACOB his II. Reply to the 3. Reason TO this your Defence of your Third Reason I answer First it is too impudent a cauillation That you charge me to giue the H. Ghost the lye in denying your Assumption I meant
17. are none other then the proud glittering titles wherewith they garnish their vsurped authoritie to make it seeme glorious to the worlde hauing within them conteyned the great misterie of iniquitie What other els saith he also is Pope Cardinall Metropolitan Primate Archbishop Diocean Archdeacon Officiall Chauncelour Commissarie Deane Prebend Parsons Vicar and such like but very names of blasphemie For offices they are not appointed by the holy Ghost nor yet once mentioned in the scriptures This Iohn Bale held and published Then which what can be more full and euident against them And againe writing vpon the 14. chapter of the Reuelation In Image of both churches vpō Reu. 14.9 he hath these wordes To receyue the beastes marke in their foreheads hands is both to agree to such decrees traditions lawes constitutions actes and proclamations as they vnder those titles haue made onely for their own couetousnes and pompe and neither for the glorie of God nor yet for the right maintenance of the Christian cōmon wealth And also to be sworn to the same to subscribe to it to giue counsell or ayde to it to mainteyne it by learning to minister in it to execute vnder it to accuse punishe and put to death for it or to thinke it lawfull and godly with such like And “ Ibid. vpon Reuel 16.12 afterward vpon the 16. of the Reuelation expounding the drying vp of the waters of Euphrates to be this That the welthy Popes possessions and pleasurs of the Clergy their false feates once known are and shal be cleerly taken away from them He saith Moreouer In * Marke also by this of what time estate hee speaketh euen of such when the Gospell was preached the Monasteries suppressed England by the Gospell preaching haue many of these waters bene dried vp in the suppression of the monasteries prioryes couents and Friers houses yet are not all thinges brought vnto Christs cleare institution A cincere Christian-order cannot yet be seene there And a great cause why For all is not yet dried vp there The Bishops reigne still in asmuch vaine glorious pompe and with as many Heathenish obseruations as euer they did As cruelly harted and as bloody minded are they yet as euer they were afore No mischiefe vnsought to holde in the waters Marke howe “ He meaneth the Prelates of these Seas Winchester Durham Yorke London and Lyncolne worke let vs also now adde Canterburie with such other pleasantlie disposed Euphratynes But be of good comfort pray in the meane time For the holy Ghost promiseth heere that they shall wither away withall that the heauenly Father hath not planted All which generation will the Lords breth cōsume c. Likewise may be shewed by the testimonie of others in former tymes as of Iohn Wickliffe who * Actes Monumen 4. edi 1. vol. pa. 150. helde and affirmed That Archbishops Bishops Archdeacons Officialls Deanes Cannons were disciples of Antichrist In like manner of William Swinderby who * Ibid. pag. 36.8 b. said that what Pope Cardinal Bishop Prelate or Priest in manner of liuing or teachching or lawes making contrarie to Christs liuing his lawes or any other ground put in ruling of the Church of Christ but by Christ and his lawes is very Antichrist aduersarie to Iesus Christ and his Apostles Also Syr John old Castle Lord Cobham who “ Ibid. pag. 5621 b. 563. held affirmed that the Bishops Priestes Prelates and Monkes were the body of the great Antichrist And that the possessions and Lordships of the Clergy were the venime of Iudas shed into the Church Likewise Iohn * Ibid. pag. 639. b Cladon burnt in Smithfield held professed that the Archbishops Bishops speaking indifferently are the seates of the beast Antichrist when he sitteth in them and reigneth aboue other people in the darke Calues of errors and heresies Moreouer that the Bishops licence for a mā to preach the worde of God is the true character of the beast that is Antichrist Finally William “ In his treatises called the obedience of a christian man and the pracsise of Prelats Tindall and Iohn * In his Preface before his Antythesis betweene Christ and the Pope Frith held and publissed That Archb. Lordb. Archdeacons Deanes Officialls Parsons Vicars and the rest of that sort are the disciples of Antichrist yea very Antichristes themselues These are the speeches and testimonies of the holy Martirs in former ages whereunto diuerse other such like might bee added But these may suffice for the matter in hand And now compare with these thinges alleadged the publique profession practise of England euen as it is by law at this day and see whether their own proofes bee not so many witnisses against themselues But if it were so that the reformed Churches wee our selues and the Martirs of former time had geuen allowance of their present estate Church constitution what would this help thē when all the word of God condemneth thē as we haue shewed in our Reasons aforesaid defence therof Whereunto if they will still iustifie their estate wee require direct answer from poinct to poinct and that from the scriptures which only can stablish the conscince Now furthermore that the truth it selfe and their estate may better appeare what it is as also that they may not turne away or obscure the truth by their subtill shiftes and euasions as their manner is we will therefore propound vnto them a few questions concerning the poinctes now in controuersie in this land desiring their playne and sincere answers thereunto by the word of God as they will answer him in his great day The questions are these 1 Whether the Lord Iesus Christ haue by his last Testament geuen vnto and set in his Church sufficient ordinary 1. Offices with their 2. Callings 3. Workes and 4. Maintenance for the administration of his holy things and for the sufficient ordinary instruction guidance and seruice of his Church to the end of the world or no. 2 Whether the Offices of Pastors Teachers Elders Deacons and helpers be those offices appincted by Christ in his last Testament as aforesaid .. Or whether the present ecclesiasticall Offices of Archbishops Lordbishops Suffragans Deanes Prebendaries Cannons Petticannos Gospellers Pistlers Virgirers Queristers Organ-players Priests Deacons or halfe Priestes Archdeacons Doctors of diuinitie Batchelers of diuinity Chaplyns or House-priestes Commissaries Officialls Procters Apparitors Parsons Vicars Curates Vagrant or Mercinary preachers Church-wardens Sidemen Clerkes Sextons and the rest now had in these Cathedrall and parishionall assemblies be those offices appoincted by Christ in his last Testament as is aforesaid or no. 3 Whether the Callinges and entraunce into these Ecclesiasticall offices last aforesaid their Administration and Maintenance nowe had and receiued in England be the manner of calling administration maintenaunce which Christ hath appoincted for the offices of his church aboue named or no. 4 Whether euery true visible church of
A DEFENCE OF THE CHVRCHES AND MINISTERY OF ENGLANDE Written in two Treatises against the Reasons and Obiections of Maister FRANCIS IOHNSON and others of the separation commonly called BROWNISTS Published especially for the benefitt of those in these partes of the lowe Countries MIDDELBVRGH By Richard Schilders Printer to the States of Zealand 1599. THE PVBLISHER TO THE CHRISTIAN READER ABout Three Yeeres since Maister Iacob hauing some speach with certen of the separation before mentioned concerning their peremptory vtter separation frō the Churches of England was requested by them briefly to sétt down in wryting his Reason for defence of the said Churches And they would either yeild vnto his proofes or procure an answer vnto the same Wherevpon the Argument following this Preface was set downe in wryting by Maister Iacob which the said parties did send to Maister Fr. Iohnson being then prisoner in the Clinke in Southwark who made an answer vnto the same conteyning 3. Exceptions and 9. Reasons in denyall of the Assumption Wherevnto Maister Iacob Replyed Afterward Maister Iohnson defended his said Exceptions and Reasons And finally Maister Iacob Replyed againe As by the particulars themselues appeareth Now hauing weighed and considered with my selfe the great ignorance and errors wherewith those of the separation aforesaid are and haue bene lately carried awaye namely to affirme That all that stande members of the Churches of Englande are no true Christians nor in state of saluation And such like most vngodly sentences which would grieue any Christian soule once to thinke on much more to publish to the view of the world And weighing likewise withall the greate weakenes of manie Christians among vs who through want of experience or due consideration of things as they are may easelie by their delusions be drawne away into those errors with them I haue therefore Aswell in hope of reclaiming of the said parties from their said extremities which now I iudge the most of them for want of meanes see not As also for the staying of others from running into the same grieuous excesse with them now published this discourse to the view of the world which hath line buryed in the hands of some few Many being desirous of it who by reason of the largnes in wryting out of the same could not obteyne it Wherevnto I am so much the rather induced For that the Reasons herein by Maister Iacob alleadged haue by Gods blessing reclaymed many from their former errors and satisfied others who haue bene doubtfull and subiect to fall into the same In the examining of which Discourse I shall desire the Reader to obserue a few notes for his better proffiting in the same 1. And First among the rest to note this as a token of the strange and obstinate dealing of Maister Iohnson and others of them viz. That heretofore vntill such time as the Argument hereafter mentioned was framed aganst them they neuer denyed That the doctrine and profession of the Churches of England was sufficient to make those that beleeued and obeyed them to be true Christians and in state of saluation But alwayes held professed and acknowledged the contrarie As by the publike confessions of themselues namely Maister Barrow Maister Penry and Maister Iohnson himselfe in this discourse mentioned in Pag. 81. appeareth But nowe they seing That if they should acknowledge the said Doctrines and profession to be sufficient to saluation That then this conclusion would of necessitie follow that those that hold and practize thē are a true * Which yet Maister Penry confessed see Pag. 82. Church And so their own former iudgements should be crossed Rather I say then they would be drawne to that They nowe stick not to deny their owne confessions which they thinke to be the saifest way for them and like vnnaturall children so vehemently hate contemne and dispise their mother who bare them nourished and brought them vp from whose brests they sucked that sweete milke of the meanes of euerlasting life and saluation if euer they had any tast of it at all Beeing notwithstanding not abashed nowe in a desperate manner in the hardnes of their heart to affirne * Which appeareth generally by denying the Assumption of Ma. Iacobs particularly in these pages 13. 62. 63. 64. That none by the doctrine of the Churches of England can be a true Christian or saued But that they all worship God in vaine Are abolished from Christ Are Babilonians Idolaters departers from the faith worse then Infidels And such like most vnchristian sentences making them all one with the Church of Rome c. Which impious affirmations would cause any Christian heart to lament and bleed for grief Whose vnchristian sentences and false and deceiptfull Reasons the very naming whereof were sufficient to refute them are most plainly taken awaye and cleane ouerthrowne by these brief Replies of Maister Iacob vnto euery of them vnto which I referre yow Onely this I adde with all which I would desire might be noted That if they continew in their former confessions That the doctrines and profession of the Churches of England are sufficient to saluation As they ought it being the very truth Then are they all in a most grieuous schisme in so peremptorily condempning and separating from such true Christians and Churches And if they deny it as they haue begonne to doe Then doe they runne headlong into an intollerable sinne and extremitie without all warrant of Gods word And besides giue iust occasion to be called fearfull * Which name they vniustly giue to those that iustly for this their extremity forsake their fellowship Apostates in so wholy falling and that aduisedly for aduantage sake as it seemeth plainely to appeare from so notable a truth which before they imbraced and acknowledged 2 Secondly I would desier the Reader not to be carried away with the multitude of corruptions from the Question or matter in hand viz. Whether the good doctrines of the Churches of England are sufficient to saluation in them that in simplicitie of heart beleeue and imbrace them notwithstanding the multitude of errors and corruptions which Maister Iohnson repeateth to the contrarie But to haue an especiall regard vnto the same Which is the maine poinct that hath and doeth altogeather deceiue them viz. To haue an eye to the corruptions in the Ministerie worship and gouernement of the Churches of England But neuer to looke vnto the nature and force of them whether simply of their owne nature they ouerthrow faith and Christianitie or whether they be held of obstinacy and a conuicted conscience or not Therefore I pray you marke and examine the errors which they reckon vp and I desire the same also of them for whose good especially I published this Treatise And after due consideration see if those errors are simplie of that nature which before we haue noted If they be not as Maister Iohnson nor all the men in the world shall euer be able to proue they are Then doe
therewith And thus their Obiection of the Iewish constitution is I trust fully answered So that still their peremptory separation and condempning of the Churches of England for some outward corruptions temayneth still a grieuous sinne vpon their heades for which without harty repentance they shall one day answer before God which will be too heauie a burthen for them to beare Lastly concerning our corruptions As we cannot iustifie them to be no corruptions but must needes acknowledge that there are many yet remaining in our land which were left by that man of sinne are as thornes vnto our sides Iudg. 2.3 which we hope God will in time abolish So dare we not runne into your extremities to condempne our Churches for such corruptions but waight the appoincted time of God for the redresse thereof Yet in the meane time so longe as those most excellent truthes and doctrines of saluation for which God make vs thankfull are still reteyned and held as soundly as by any Church vpon the face of the earth the other errors not simply ouerthrowing the same beeing not held of obstinacy and being also for the most parte of great controuersie and disputation amonge the learned So long I say communion in things lawfull is to be kept with them as before is noted in the example of other Churches Otherwise it will come to passe by reason of the * Mat. 25.13 to 23. diuersitie in opinions and iudgmentes which by the corruption of our nature we remaine in in this tabernacle as hath “ Leu. 4. Psal 19.12 bene in all ages and * 1 Cor. 13.9 12. shal be so long as this life of imperfection indureth that no communion can euer bee had with any Church liuing no nor any one Christian with another Which to affirme were most absurd and vngodly These obseruations beeing considered I doubt not but the Lorde will adde a blessing to this worke That such as are simple hearted and haue exceeded in eagernesse of zeale may see their extremitie in so rashly and vnaduisedly separating from and condempning the Churches of England sometimes their Nurses and Mothers as before is noted Whereby God may haue the glory and themselues the comforte euen the saluation of their soules through Christ D. B. AN ARGVMENT PROVING THAT the Churches of England are the true Churches of God VVHatsoeuer is sufficient to make a particuler man a true Christian and in state of saluation That is sufficient to make a companie so gathered togeather to bee a true Church BVt the whole doctrine as it is publiquelie * Booke of Articles published Anno 1562. professed and practized by law in England is sufficient to make a particuler man a true Christian and in state of saluation * See further for these words in Pag. 3. and our publique Assemblies are therein gathered togeather THerefore it is sufficient to make the publique Assemblies true Churches H. IACOB Against the Assumption of the said Argument Mr Iohnson made 3. Exceptions and 9. Reasons which hereafter follow in order Together with Mr Iacobs Replies vnto the same But before we come to the examination of the saide Assumption let vs see first what he saith against the Proposition Fr. IOHNSON TO omitt the Proposition vntill it better appeare by their defence of the Assumption how to take and vnderstand it we will for the present only shewe the weakenes of the Assumption and this also the rather because they seeme wholy to depend vpon it H. IACOB THe answerer omitteth the Proposition for in deed it is most certen But he denyeth the Assumption which yet is as certen also That the doctrine in our booke of Articles is sufficient to make a true Christian Fr. IOHNSON In our former answere to this argument we omitted the proposition not because of the certentie of it euery way as the Replier dreameth but vntill we might see by his defence of the †The Assumption is examined and maintained Pag. 4. assumption how to take it as thē we noted Nowe therefore hauing seene in his reply the vnlearned vngodly and vnconscionable pretences by which he would seeme to defende the Assumption when in deed he doth nothing else but cast a miste before the eyes of the simple we giue him to vnderstand that the whole argument is lame and faultie in euery parte thereof The Proposition is not absolutelie true as it appeareth he vnderstandeth it by his defence of the Assumption The Assumption is not only false as we proued in our former answer but also lacketh a foote whereon it should goe if it were perfect and entier For whereas in the Proposition mention is made not only of the making of a true Christian but also of a companie so gathered together he should in the Assumption if he would haue had it sound and perfect not onely haue assumed that the doctrine c. is sufficient to make a true Christian but haue added also that their assemblies be cōpanies so gathered togither Which being not done both the Assumption wanteth one of the feete and the conclusion inserreth more then was in the premisses and so the whole silogisme is faultie and disfigured Thus might we without any further answer returne this argument to the first framers of it to be better fashioned Yet in hope that they may bee brought through the blessing of God to receiue the loue of the trueth that they may be saued and with their giftes no more to plead for and deck the whore of Babilon to help forward the building beautifying of Sion we will more particularly lay open to them the weaknes of this his reply And first whereas he affirmeth that the Proposition is most certen yet in his defence of the Assumption he declareth that he so taketh it as whatsoeuer amongst them be iointly togeather held and ioyned with that which otherwise might make a ture Christian or a true Church yet notwithstanding they are so to be reputed as if there were no such additions or commixtures we answere that in this sence the Proposition neither is nor can be absolutely true as it ought to be if they would haue their argument good For who knoweth not that such “ Gal. 5.2.4 things may bee ioined with Christ as abolish from Christ. And againe †2. Cor. 6.14 25. that Christ and Antichrist can not accord togither Either therefore the Proposition is not generall but admitteth limitations and then is not the Argument good Or if it bee generall without any limitation so as whatsoeuer be added too or cōmingled with that which otherwise might make a true Christian or a true Church yet it hindreth nothing at all Thē is it not absolutely true in such vnderstanding as may appeare by the former exceptions diuers other that might be alleadged Next touching the Assumption besides that it is lame as before is shewed it is also vntrue as in our former answer appeareth Some balme in deed this man
bringeth to cure it but it hath no other effect saue onely to manifest to vs so much the more that the soare of their Assemblies cannot be healed In our former answere we first tooke 3. Exceptions against them comparing together their profession and practise then we alleadged 9. Reasons directly concluding the falshood of the Assumption H. IACOB BEfore I examine this your answer I would desire you and all others to note that all your Exceptions and Reasons with your defence of them hereafter following doe consist of these three generall pointes 1. That euerie person in England holding our publik faith is no true Christian 2. That all the Christians and Churches in King Edwards time and namelie Maister Cramner M. Ridley M. Hooper M. Latimer M. Philpot M. Saunders M. Rogers M. Taylor c. were all lims of Antichrist and no true Christians 3. That euery soule in England is convicted in conscience that the Praelacie is vnlawfull and vntollerable The First of these is our maine question and the grounde of all our reasoning which you gainsay The Second though it be not expreslie spoken yet it is directlie euidently and vndeniably concluded by all euery of your arguments against vs. As in the seueralls hereafter we shal see The Third you are driuen vnto for defence of your former Assertion which else falleth to the grounde And this you affirme flatly in your defence of your 1.6 and 7. Reasons Nowe my desire is that all men would take notice of these your 3 Assertions and consider indifferentlie vvhether they proceede from an honest a sober or a Christian minde And you M. Iohnson if you list hereafter to say any more defende these 3. pointes directly and plainly that your ansvveres may be briefer and more certen then now they are Novve I come to the particular examination of your former answerere First you say You omitted the Proposition before not for the soundnes of it but only because you would see howe I meant it Why He that hath but halfe an eye may see the meaning of those vvordes where is no darknes nor doubtfulnes of sence at all What fault finde you in it nowe Forsooth first a want in the Assumption then vntruethes both in the Proposition and Assumption of my Sillogisme There wanteth you say that I should expresse in the Assumptiō That our Assemblies be companies gathered togeather in the doctrines ordinances which we all by lawe publiquely professe and practise Who but a wrangler would not vnderstand that I meant so much Nay doe not my expresse wordes imply asmuch vvhen I say We by lavve publiquely professe and practise them Then are not our Assemblies vvhich are by lavv gathered together in this profession povver Fy for shame these are sencelesse cauilations But because vvhat in me lyeth I vvould not haue you any more to stumble at a strawe I haue to satisfie you vvithall Not that the Argumēt is vnsound without this addition But because the Reader may see howe you will play at a smal game rather then sit out vt aiunt novve added those words to the Assumption aforesaid in a contrarie letter which you desire viz. and our publike assemblies are therein gathered togeather Secondly you say that my proposition meaneth that what soeuer is held togeather and ioyned with that which otherwise might make a true Christian or a true Church Yet notwitstanding they are so to be reputed as if there were no such additions or comixtures O strange dealing in all my writing I haue no such worde no silable no letter sounding to that sence I haue directly contrary in my answere to your Fourth Reason as your self noteth there Yet yow M. Iohnson with out al shame in the view of the world doe Father on me this foule vntruth and most sencelesse errour in your first entrance Further where as it seemeth you reproue my Proposion requiring to to haue it set thus Whatsoeuer is sufficient to make a particuler man a true Christian and hath nothing added with it distroying the foundation of faith That is sufficient to make a company so gathered togither a true Church You must know Mr. Iohnson that that were an idle vaine addition for wheresoeuer there are any such things added distroying faith there whatsoeuer else seemeth sufficient indeed it is not sufficient to make a true Christian Wherefore nodum in scirpo quaeris this is to finde a knot in a rush Thus much concerning the trunes of my Proposition The Assumption examined by the Exceptions and Reasons following Lastly you come to deny my Assumption or rather to maintaine your denyall heretofore giuen Where first note that by denying my assumption yovv affirme the first generall poinct noted in this beginning That euery particuler person in England holding our publike faith here is not true Christian Which O Lorde who would not tremble to thinke on Euen that which this man aboue two yeares a goe affirmed and now againe aduisedly and wilfully defendeth I take heauen and earth to record this day whether this be not desperate madnes yea or no. But let vs examine your exceptions and reasons against my Assumption more particularly we shall see what stuffe it is Your first exception against the same is as followeth Maister Iohnsons I. Exception against the former Assumption with Maister Iacobs Replies to the same EXCEPTION I. FIrst let here be considered the 19. Article of that doctrine and booke which is alleaged by themselues for their defence and see if their profession and practize be not contrary one to an other Yea whether euen by their owne doctrine and confession conteyned in that booke it be not monifest that they haue not a true visible Church of Christ The words of the Article are these The visible Church of Christ is a Congregation of faithfull men in the which the pure word of God is preached Artic. 19. and the Sacraments be duely ministred according to Christs ordinance in all those things that of necessitie are requisite to the same These are their owne wordes and doctrine Now if they cannot proue their Assemblies to be such they may see that their own witnesses euen their own doctrine book alleadged giue verdict against thē If they can proue them to be such where and what are their proofes touching the particulers mentioned in this their owne discription of a visible Church of Christ H. IACOB his I. Reply to the 1. Excep THis his first Exception is the 19. Article of this very book which we alleage wherein a visible Church is discribed to be a Congregation where the pure word is preached and Sacramentes ministered according to all those thinges that of necessitie are requisite Now this discription he reiecteth not but our practise saith he is contrary and therefore we haue no true visible Churches nor Christians I answer wherin is it contrarie in what things that of necessite are requisite doth not all this Christian world see
confesse that our publike practise is agreable to our profession in that booke Nay saith he but proue you your assemblies to be such and if you can proue them where and what are your proofs if you do not you are confuted A worthy confutacion sure very Clercklike As if my Tenaunt should deny me rent for my house land yea and go to law with me for the fee simple which he hath holden in ferme of me these 40. yeares and I haue hetherto quietlie enioyed from my Auncestours time out of minde Now he suing me at law for that which I thus possesse faith proue your right to this land which you haue if you can what and where be your proofes let me see them Or els I your Tenaunt will haue it This were goodly dealing were it not and very lawfull Euen so doe you asking proofes of vs for that which we possesse and haue possessed before you made any question about it nay you your selues held parte of this possession of vs and with vs till yesterday when you began first to lay claime in this sorte to the whole Now your reason is let vs proue it to be ours where be our proofs Or els you will not acknowledge vs any longer see I pray you your owne equity If this suffice not to make you desist I leaue it to the Iudges to giue sentence Secondly note further Our Article saith A Church is where the word is preached Sacraments ministred according to all things that of necessitie are requisite Where we plainly insinuate that many errors may be added truthes wanting in a visible Church but nothing which is absolutely necessary Now what doth our practize in Preaching or Sacraments want that is absolutely necessarie without which there cannot be any true preaching or Sacraments at all shew it vs because we see it not our selues I assure you vntill then your first reason hath no reason in it F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 1. Excep HOw fit or vnfit the said discription of a visible Church mentioned in the 19. Article of the said book is we neither did nor doe examine Onely because this is their owne profession and wee see their practise is contrary vnto it we did therfore from hence take our first exception requiring of them to shew their assemblies to be such or els to know that their own discription is a witnes against themselues Now in their reply haue they according to the particulers of that description iustified their Church-assemblies nothing lesse Let this therefore be first obserued But what then haue they donne Surely this First pretending as if they repeated our exception and their owne discription they leaue out diuers perticulers of speciall moment there expressed as first where the visible Church is discribed to bee a congregation of faithfull men they leaue out these wordes of faithfull men belike knowing that their Congregations which are holds of all foule spirits and cages of euery vncleane and hatefull bird Reuel 18.2 cannot therefore iustly bee accoumpted congregations of faithfull men Secondly where the description speaketh that the Sacraments be duely ministered they leaue out the word duely because it crosseth their womens Baptisme priuate Communion receiuing of the most prophane and their seede c. Lastly where in the description it is reqaired both for preaching the pure word and due administration of the Sacraments that they be donne according to Christes ordinance they leaue out altogither these words according to Christes ordinance belike because this clause quite ouerthroweth both their Antichristian Prelacy from which all the inferior Ministers amongst them receiue power and authoritie to preach and minister the Sacramentes and their Priesthood and Deaconery wherein they all administer and their stinted imposed prayers exhortations crosses on the forehead questiones to the infantes vse of the same wordes in English in ministering the Lords supper which the papists vsed and still vse in Latine not reteyning the words of Christs institution and such like Now thus hauing left out such perticulers as were of spetiall moment against them they next demaund wherein their practize is contrary to their profession and discription of a visible Church in what things that of necessitie are requisite We aunswere in all the particulers of that description aforesaid For firste their Church-assemblies are not congregations of faithfull men but a confusion of all manner of people though neuer so wicked and prophane The “ D. Whithg last booke pag. 176. and 178. Prelates and Formalistes affirme that their Church is full of Atheistes Papistes Idolaters Drunkards Whoremōgers such like The †Sermon on Rom. 12. pag. 65. and 66. Demonstratiō in the preface forward Preachers likewise auerre that in their church are swarmes of Atheists Idolators Papistes erronious hereticall sectaries Witches Charmers Sorcerers Murtherers Theeues Adulterers Lyers c. Finally that a mā may be any thing amongst thē sauing a sound Christian. These things being so as both their estate and writings beare witnesse let themselues iudge whether their Assemblies can be accounted Congregations of faithfull men or no which is the first poinct of the description aforesaid Secondly in the same description is required That the pure worde of God be preached according to Christes ordinance But amongst them are allowed besides the word of God the Apocripha bookes and in stead of preaching the worde the reading of Homilies as may appeare in that booke of Articles alleadged by themselues Yet who knoweth not that in those bookes are diuers vntruthes errors contradictions blasphemies and such like So farre are they from being the pure word of God or agreeing therewith Moreouer when and where the worde is preached among them it is done by vertue of a false office and calling neuer appointed by Christ. And the Ministers that preach it doe in their constitution stand alwayes subiect to be silenced suspended excommunicated and degraded by the Prelates and Ordinaries to whom when they are made Priestes they promise and when they enter vpon a benefice they sweare Canonicall obedience Neither are they suffered any further to preach the word and trueth of God then agreeth with the Articles Iniunctions aduerticements and caueats in that behalfe prouided If any preach the worde of God anie further they are subiect to be silenced banished put to death That these things accord with the ordinance of Christ or with their owne description of a visible Church we suppose themselues will not for shame affirme it Lastlie in their description it is required That the Sacramentes bee duely ministred according to the ordinance of Christ in all things that of necessitie are requisite to the same Nowe by the ordinance of Christ in the administration of the Sacramentes there are necessarilie required 1. A lawfull Minister 2. A lawfull people And thirdly A lawfull administration according to the Testament of Christ In all which their practize is conerarie to the ordinance of Christ and their
own description aforesaid Their Ministers all of them are either Prelates Priestes or Deacons which amongst them is a step to the Priesthood none of which Christ hath ordeyned in his Testament for the worke of his ministerie Their people are not separated from the world but stande in confusion with it and in subiection to the Antichristian Prelates and Prelacie See Iohn 15.19 17.14.16 1. Iohn 4.5 6 Act. 2.40 and 19.9 Reuel 18.4 14.9 And therefore can not be deemed a true church of God the people of Christ vnto whom in such estate the Sacraments which are seales of the couenant of grace doe apperteyne and may be administred Finally their administration is acçording to the inuentions and precepts of man with stinted prayers exhortations Epistles and Gospels and besides those in Baptisme crossing on the forehead questions to the infant in the Lords supper translating and vsing out of the Masse booke other wordes then the wordes of Christes institution and such like as may bee seene at large in their booke of common prayer which is picked and culled out of the Masse booke full of all abominations as “ Admonitiō to the Parlament second treatis themselues haue published heretofore These things we haue ben forced thus to mention at large both because they twice demaund as if they knewe not themselues wherein their practise is contrarie to that description aforesaid and because they blush not to affirme that all the Christian world seeth and confesseth their practize to be aggreeable to their profeession in that booke Whereas the contrarie is most true Touching which what themselues haue heretofore written to the contrarie See in the Admonitions to the Parleament Replyes of T. C. against D. Whitguift Demonstration of Discipline c And what the reformed Churches professe to the contrarie see in the Frenche Belgicke and Heluetian Churches and in the Harmonie of cōfessions Sect. 10. 11. which would be too long to set downe at large in this place Neither is it needfull seeing it is most euident in the books and places alleadged whether we referre the Reader Thus also it appeared what iust cause wee had to put them to proue their assemblies to be such as themselues discribe visible Churches to bee Which seing they haue not yet done and seing their practice is contrarie to their profession as now at their request we haue shewed in the perticulers aforesaid If they still bee minded as before wee doe also still aske where and what are their proofes touching the perticulers mentioned in their owne description of a visible Church Their similitude of a Landlord and Tennaunt is against themselues so wortthy and Clercklike is their reply If any haue vsurped or otherwise made a false clame neuer so long to a piece of lād or other possession may they not iustly be called vpon to shew their title bring fourth their euidence Let the Iudges giuē sentence If I deny their clame and title to be such let him shew their euidence from the Apostles writinges Let vs from thence see their euidence for the offices of Archbs. Lordbs Suffraganas Archdeacons Chauncelers Commissaries Officials Priests Parsons Vicars Cnraets c For their entrance into their Offices according to their Cannons and Booke of ordering Priestes and Deacons and of consecrating Archbishops and Bishops For their administration by their stinted imposed Liturgy and by their Popish Cannons Officers and proceedings For their Churching of women praying ouer the dead Holy-dayes to Saints and Angels Fastes on their Eaues c. For their maintenance by Tythes Chrisomes Offerings c. For their confused communion of all sortes of people though neuer so wicked in the body of their Church c. Let them I say shewe vs euidence for those from the Apostles writinges if they deny their claime to bee such as wee haue noted Otherwise if they †Isay 8.20 speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them neither any right to that they challendge Where they say vve held part of their possession vvith thē heretofore If they meane that we with them receiued the beastes marke and drunke of the cup of Babels abominations we deny it not but acknowledge Gods mercy that passing ouer our sinnes hath giuen vs grace and strength at his “ Reue. 18.4 2 Cor. 6.17 18 Actes 2.4 commaundement to forsake that way of Antichrist and to come out of that spirituall Babilon to saluation of our soules which mercy wee wish also vnto these men that so being saued from this froward generatiō they may become the sonnes and daughters of the Lord almighty in Christ our Sauiour Touching their Article Preaching Sacraments Ministration c. enough is said before Onely where they say they see not themselues wherin they faile touching Preaching or Sacramēts in things necessary It is too impudent vntruth as their * Admonition to the Parliament T. C. his replies in defence thereof Demonstratiō of discipline Declaration defence of Ecclesiastical discipline c. former writtings doe and will alwayes testifie to their faces which wee will not stand here to relate That shall suffice which we haue touched before which till it bee aunswered it will be found that our first exception hath both reason and weight in it whatsoeuerthey doe or can pretend to the contrarie H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 1. Excep HEre is much adoe to no purpose You obserue 4. pointes in our Article omitted by mee vvherein our practize is contrarie to our profession Firste our Article requireth a visible Church to bee an assembly of faithfull men But our assemblies say you are not so This is false they are so you shall neuer proue in vs the contrarie more then appeareth was in the Church of the Iewes both Auncient and in the time of Christ And yet they then were the true Church As I haue elswhere in this Booke sufficiently proued and shewed against you That which you bring of D. Whitgift and other writers amongst vs of the prophanesse of many in our assemblies you depraue their meaninges vtterlie for though they graunt verie many such to be amongst vs yet they say not that all our assemblies are such nor our whole assemblies Neither denie they our assemblies to be companies of faithfull men or vtterly to be separated from Nay the contrarie doe they euen that onely they ought to be reformed Therefore you too grossely abuse them Secondly The Article requireth the pure worde of God to be preached But say you the Apocrypha books reading of Homilies other errors are allowed in our practize Yea surely in our professiō too as your selfe obserueth in the book of Artic. yet then our profession practise differ not as you charg our Churches But these poinctes are not the pure word of God Neither doth the Article meane that in a visible church euery iot title both of our professiō practize must needs be
out of the pure word They knew that euery visible Church might did erre in somewhat Onely it meaneth that a visible Church might not erre in any poinct that of necessitie is requisite as their wordes expresse It resteth then that you shew that the pure word is not preached in our assemblies by law sufficiently to saluation which yet you doe not nor can doe Therefore you say nothing For I for my part know well that our Churches faile from the pure word in sundrie lesser points which though they be errours yet are they not Fundamentall neither doe they in their ovvne nature abolish from Christ Thirdlie the Article hath according to Christes ordinance But you saye that we preach in strange and false functions such as are not Christes ordinances This is false too Our ordinarie Preachers are true Pastours as touching the substance of Pastorall calling as I haue often aunswered you albeit they haue a wrong ordination from the Prelacie See my defence of this poinct as also of that concerning the confusion of our people in my other writing long since deliuered to you touching the †In my aunswer to the 1. reason of that treatise following in the end of this booke comparing of the condition of a Ministerie with Mariadge Now this ordinance of Christ to haue a true Pastor to a faithfull people is sufficient for the being of a true Church though not for the perfection of it Contrarie to the which you haue nothing but words Lastlie the Article requireth due administration of Sacraments But our practize say you herein is not due or intier because there concurre diuers corruptions withall as stinted prayers exhortations Epistles Gospels Crossing in Baptisme c. I answere all these simplie of them selues doe not abolishe our Sacraments If you thinke they doe say so and you shal be refuted If nay Then this very Article signifieth so much That corruptions and faultes might be in the Sacraments but nothing amisse that of necessitie is requisite Novve all these 4. poinctes I haue omitted say you True in wordes I haue but in sence I expresse them all and euery one when for breuities sake I comprehended all in this generall clause of this Article according to all that is of necessitie requisite How say you haue I not herein conteyned and signified all these your exceptions and that accordinge to the meaning of the Article If I haue as it is most true then doe you vnconscionablie abuse me in saying I pretended to repeate our description in the Article and yet leaue out diuers perticulars of speciall moment And let this therefore be first obserued I haue omitted nothing materiall in that Article Yea let this be here noted that in all this you haue moste fondlie abused your penne and tounge Yet will you still demaund how our practise agreeth with our profession in that 19. Article Still I answer you with that similitude of a foolish and importinate Tēnaunt against his Landlord If I haue held possession and my aunestors before my time out of minde indeed the King laying claime to it hee may call for my euidence because * Time prescribeth not against the Prince nullum tempus occurrit Regi But against my fellow subiects possession inheritance so longe without interruption is of it selfe euidence in lawe good enough except the plaintif can bring better to the contrary Therefore it were absurd and sencelesse before any Iudge in England for a Tenaunt to put such a Landlord to shew his euidence in such a case Euen so as absurd it is for you seeing at first you were of vs and now are gone out from vs to put vs to proue our selues to be such as heretofore you neuer doubted of If now you doubt and contradict it shew you your reason as better euidence or els all men wil condempne your folly Where you put me to proue all our offices of the Hyerarchie their ceremonies c. What needeth it I neuer tooke it vpon me Except first you doe shew that these corruptions all or any of them absolutely in their own nature doe abolish vs all cleane from Christ make vs vnpossible to be saued which vntill you doe still I say I see not any peece of reason in all these your words And lastly where you say it is an impudent vntruth that I say we see not that any thing necessarie is wanting in our Church And to this end you quote to conuince me The Admonition T. C. his Replies Demonstration Declaration and the Defence of Discipline c. This is indeed too bold an vntrueth a wilfull peruerting of your allegations None of all these doe graunt any thing to be wanting with vs that is necessary to the being of a Church simply nor to the being of a true Ministery or Sacraments But onely to their well and conuenient being How honest then are you to falsifie your own witnesses so openly Maister Iohnsons 2. Exception against the former Assumption with Maister Iacobs Replies to the same EXCEPTION 2. SEcondly let them tell vs whether they hold professe Iesus Christ to be the Prophet Priest and King of his Church to be obeyed in his own ordinance onely and in no other And if they doe then let them shew vs how their practize agreeth with this profession H. JACOB his 1. Reply to the 2. Excep TO this Second Exception That Christ is our Prophet Priest King I aunswere The booke of Articles our Ministers now and Congregations generally doe hold and professe the same our practize being answerable likewise thervnto euen as before time Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer and such like with their Congregations did then viz. That Christ is our Prophet Priest and King and to be obeyed in his own ordinances onely and in no other This I say we generally professe and practize Howbeit this note with all we hold Christs ordinance to be of two sortes written or vnwritten the first necessary the second arbitrary The firste touching doctrine that is touching faith and the inward opinion only such as these The doctrine of God his Nature his Persons his Properties of the Messias Christ Iesus of Iustification of Sanctification of the Resurection c. Wherein standeth the †1. Cor. 3.12.23 foundation of sauing faith All these must be in the writen word or els to bee none of Christes The second touching outward orders in the Church which are truly called accounted Christs own also although particularly deuised and appoincted by the Church whom Christ hath authorized therevnto euen as it shal be thought most fit and profitable for the present times places and persons such we hold all outward gouernement and ceremonies to bee because they be not simply of the foundation neither written nor certen nor perpetuall but at the arbitrarie appoinctment of the Church and Magistrate and yet to be Christes owne neuerthelesse who hath left this libertie for the Church to vse Thus we hold
and thus we practise and wee are perswaded no Scripture to be against all this but rather for it I speake now concerning our Ministers and Congregations generally that is our publike Church state If yow say but there are diuers amongest vs that thinke otherwise I answere But this is the generall estate both of our Ministers and Churches howsoeuer one or two amongest hundreths or thousands may thinke otherwise shew the contrary if you can And our Churches they certenly must bee deemed after their generall estate and constitution not as one or two men thinke If you say this generall opinion and practize is an error Therefore they obey not Christs ordinances in truth herein though they thinke they doe I answere let it be so it is now * An error though not foundamētall the error of their iudgment as it was in Maister Cranmer Ridley c. Not pregnaunt rebellion and disobedience to Christe not a conuicted or seared conscience so that their other “ 1. Cor. 3.12 15. truthes of the foundation are not frustrat nor Christ made to none effect in thē And this is all our questiō Whether they remaine Christians still for all these faultes yea or no. F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 2. Excep COncerning our Second Exception it was propounded by way of demaund requiring that they would shewe vs if they held Jesus Christ to be the Prophet Priest King of his Church to be obeyed in his own ordinances onely and in no other howe then their practize agreeth with this profession One would haue thought that here it had bene good and needfull if they could to haue cleared this poinct by the Scriptures and the Testament of Christ and from thence to haue manifested that their Ministerie worship ministration gouernement c. which are called in questiō are no other then the Lord Iesus Christ that Prophet Priest and King of his Church hath in his Testament giuen and appointed therevnto And haue they not done this Surely no. What then doe they say First they tell vs That touching this poinct their profession and practize nowe is so as before time it was with M. Cranmer Ridley Latimer and their Cogregations But what of this Can the persons or age of thes whom he nameth nay can anie person or ages preiudice the trueth Were not they subiect to error at all or must their errors binde vs Did not Iohn Hus that worthy champion of Christ and others also of the Martyrs in former times say and heare Masse euen to their dying day not seeing the abomin ations thereof And did not diuers of thē acknowledge some the Popes calling and Supremacie some 7. Sacramentes some Purgatorie some Auricular confession and such like greeuous errours c And yet notwithstanding dyed most constantly for the truethes which they sawe and testified some for one and some for another as God manifested the trueth vnto them As may be seene at large in their seueral Histories in the Actes and Monumentes whether wee referre the Reader But may we nowe so professe and practize in these things as they did Or if we should were their ignorance and errours a sufficient defence for vs yet thus would this man beare vs in hande But moreouer let him tell vs if Maister Latimer and others did not forsake the Prelacie and functions they had before-time receyued And Maister Ridley at his death repent that he had bene so earnest for the remnantes of Poperie in his time retayned Besides also who knoweth not that when Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. dyed Martyrs for the trueth of Christ they neither had them selues nor ioyned in spirituall communion with such as had the Prelacie and Manisterie nowe pleaded for And not that onely but were also members of that persecuted church in Queene Maries dayes which was separated from the rest of the Lande as from the world and ioyned in couenaunt by voluntarie profession to obey the trueth of Christ and to witnes against the abominations of Antichrist As they also did euen vnto death in the trueth which they sawe though otherwise being but as it were in the twylight of the Gospell they had their wantes and errors Yet who is so blinde or besotted as not to see that their errours may not bee our rules neither can be our warrant but rather that we ought after their example faithfully to stand in and for what so euer trueth God reuealeth vnto vs by his word And that otherwise those holy Martyrs should rise in iudgement against all such as either withhould the trueth in vnrighteousnesse or in any respect refuse to walke therein Finally seeing GOD hath giuen vs his worde to be the light of our feete and rule of our liues and religion What meane these men to lead vs from it to the aberrations of any men whatsoeuer Should not all people enquire at God or would they haue vs goe from the liuing to the dead From God and his worde to men and their errours Doubtlesse this is that whervnto they would bring vs and whereby they mislead their followers as will yet further appeare by that which followeth For what say they next Secondly they tell vs and they wishe it to bee noted as wee also doe That Christes ordinances be of two sortes either written or vnwritten the first necessarie the second arbitrary the first touching doctrine that is touching faith and the inward opinion onely these say they are written the second touching outward orders in the Church and all outward gōuernement and ceremonies These they say are not written but arbitrary at the appointment of the Church and Magistrate Thus they say they hold and practise and thinke no Scripture is against it In answere whereof First we aske what scripture they haue for this Secondly we alleadge against it the scriptures “ 1 Tim. 3.10 15. 5. chap. 6.13.14 Tit. 1.5 c. Act. 1.3 2.40 c. 6. cap 14.23 15. cap. and 19.9 20.7.17.28 Rō 12.6.7.8 Ephe 4 11.12 1 Thes 5.12.13.14 Phil. 1.1.5 Heb. 3.1.2.3 13.17 Iam. 5.14 1 Pet. 5.1.2.3 1 Cor. 4.17 5. cap. 9. cap 11. cap. 12. cap. 14. cap. and 16.1.2 Gal. 6 1.6.2 Thes 3.6.12.14.15 Mat. 18 15.16 17. 28.18.19.20 quoted in the margent wherevnto manie other might be added Thirdlie let it be obserued that them selues here graunt and can not denie but all the outwarde gouernement and ceremonies of their Church are inuented and arbitrary at the pleasure of man and not written in the worde of God Wherevpon it followeth that they are none of Christes and therefore not to be ioyned vnto in the worship of God as afterwards more fully will appeare Fourthlie see howe neare they are driuen that are glad to runne backe into the Papistes tentes where yet they knowe there is no succour Before they pleaded possession time out of minde nowe they tell vs of ordinances vnwritten c. are not these meere
popish shiftes euen the olde worne argumentes of antiquitie and vnwritten verities so often and so much stoode vppon by the Papistes Alas that these men should plead to be true Christians and yee thus openly take parte with Antichrist What shall we say to these things Surely God is iust and will verifie his word where he saieth That they which receyue not the loue of the trueth that they may bee saued hee will sende them stronge delusions to beleeue lyes that they may bee damned Fiftly note howe he maketh the ordinances touching outwarde gouernement and ceremonies to be no matters of faith neither writtē at all Surelie this is strange diuinitie It is an ordinance not onely concerning the inward but also the outward gouernment of the Church that Christ is Lord and King thereof It is therefore no matter of faith It cōcerneth the outward gouernment whether the Pope be vnder Christ head of the church or no Doeth it not therefore concerne faith Publique prayer preaching of the Word and hearing of it preached administration and receyuing of the Sacraments are matters concerning the outward gouernement and orders of the Church doe they not therefore touch faith Admonition and exhortation concerne also the outwarde gouernement of the Church doe they not therefore concerne faith Finally by this diuinitie the Sacraments of Baptisme and of the Lordes supper being ceremonies shal be no matters of faith at all amongst them But here they stay not but adde moreouer That the outward orders gouernement and ceremonies of the Church bee arbitrarie at the appointment of the Church and Magistrate and not certen nor written in the booke of God Whervpon it followeth that it is not certen nor taught in the scriptures but arbitrarie at the Churches Magistrates pleasure Whether Christ or the Pope of Rome or of Cāterburie be head and Archbishop of the Church of God Whether Jewes onely of the tribe of Leui may nowe minister the holy things of God in his Church Whether Christ haue giuen any giftes and set any offices in his Church for the Ministerie and guidance thereof Whether prayer must bee in a knowne or vnknowne tounge Whether the teaching and ruling Elders be to be had and honored Whether the church may excommunicate Whether the Popes or any other Prelates excommunication be to be regarded Whether there be two or three or seauen Sacramentes Whether the Passeouer Circumcision and other ceremonies and sacrifices of the Lawe be now to be vsed Whether the Heathenishe sacrifices and worship be to bee ioyned withall Whether creame oyle salt spitle crossing and coniuring be to be vsed in Baptisme Whether the bread onely and not the cup is to bee giuen to the lay people as they call them Whether holy water holy ashes holy palmes and such like be of the holy things of the church Whether the Iewish and Popish vestimentes fastes and holy dayes are to be obserued and a thousande such like which are all of them concerning the outward orders gouernement and ceremonies of the Church By these mens Diuinitie these and infinite such like are vnwritten and vncerten but left onely to the pleasure of the Church and Magistrate Moreouer if it please them the Princes and ciuill Magistrates may them selues be the publike ministers of the worde Sacraments and censures of the Church any that will may without a calling take vpon him to bee a publique officer in the church Women may baptise or administer the Lords supper The Jewishe Romish or Heathenish priesthood may be retayned Auricular confession may be vsed The Keyes of the kingdome of heauen may bee appropriated to the Pope of Rome or the Prelate of Canterburie or any other whom soeuer The Prelates and their Officials excommunications do binde in heauen The Apochriphall bookes and Decretall epistles are canonicall scriptures The Papes Portuis and the English booke of prayer taken out of it are the true and lawfull worship of God The Prelates and Priestes are the true and lawfull Ministers of God Orders pennaunce extreame vnction matrimonie c. are the Sacramentes of the Church Cap Surplis Cope Tippit Rotchet c. are ornamentes of the Ministerie Finally all ragges and trumperies of the Romish religion are good and lawfull if it please the Church and Magistrate For why They concerne the outward gouernement orders and ceremonies of the church And touching them say these men Christ hath not left any ordinances written certen or perpetuall but left them at the arbitrarie appointment of the Church and Magistrate Is not this straunge Diuinitie Yet they stay not there neither but as men that haue bent their tongues like bowes for lyes they feare not to adde moreouer that when the Church and Magistrate appointeth anie ordinances whether these or any other touching the outward gouernement ceremonies of the Church we are to account them to be Christes owne ordinances who hath left this libertie to the Church for to vse O shameles mouth O vnchristian hart Can any Papist or Atheist say more or can any desire a more euident proof then this that these men and assemblies thus holding professing and practizing as here them selues affirme can not in this estate by the word of God be deemed med true Christians and Churches Sixtly obserue howe yet moreouer they seeke shiftes would colour the matter pretending That the things which concerne outward gouernement and ceremonies are not of the foundation simply But this will helpe them no more then the other For first we aske are they of the foundation at all though not simply If they be then seeing they are not written not certen nor perpetuall as heere is affirmed it will followe that neither the whole foundation is written certen or perpetuall neither the Apostles were faithfuull and skilsull maister builders in the laying thereof If they be not then why is this worde simplie added as if they graunted that they were of the foundation though not simplie as they speake Secondlie wee aske whether the outwarde gouernement and ceremonies ordeyned by Christ for his church vnder the Gospell be not of the foundation asmuch as the outward gouernement and ceremonies appointed by Moses for the Church vnder the law Or if they be whether they are not as faithfully sett downe by Christ as the other were by Moses and as carefully to be obserued by vs as the other were by the Jewes Heb. 3.2.3 or rather much more inasmuch as Christ the Son is worthy more glorie and honour then Moses the seruant Thirdlie we aske what foundamentall poinctes Moses and Aaron with the rest of the Iewes ioyning with them helde that Corah Dathan Abiram and their companions held not Differing from them and erring only touching the Priesthood and Ministerie which concerned the outward orders gouernement of the Church was therefore Corah Dathan Abiram and their companies in that estate the true Jsraell of God Or were not the other truthes they helde by this meanes frustrate and of none effect
vrge vpon our Churches further or on my wordes doth slaunder and cauill and malitionsly depraue them and nothing else Secondly note in my explication that I iustifie not this opinion of our stare but I say Thus to beleeue and practize simply destroyeth no mans saluation in Christ which you denying generally and vehemently in your sixt answer You deny directly Maister Cranmer c. to haue held the foundation or to bee saued wherein you openly professe and proclaime that second generall poinct which in the beginning I charged you with That all Churches and Christians here in Kinge Edwards time and namely Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer Hooper Philpot Saunders Rogers Tayler c. held not Christ their Prophet Priest and King and so consequently they were lims of Antichrist for they bare his marke euen to their deaths and no true Christians Alas to see how malice and preiudice hath blinded you Is there not greater cause for vs to cry say against you O shamelesse mouth ô vnchristian heart which termes you vainely charge vpon me Is this you that white the Toombs of those Martirs and yet in fine condempne them for no true Christians nor their Assemblies for Churches You adde a clause They that professe and practize as doth the Church of England c. If you meane hereby to put a difference betwene those good mens holding this opinion and our Churches nowe Yea betwene your owne lately and ours now speake out what is it Yow can imagine none but this Those good men Maister Cranmer Ridley c. and your selfe of late held these very same errors of the outward Church order which wee doe But they and you did it seemeth of simplicity we malitiously they of ignorance wee of plaine obstinacie and hauing a conuicted and seared conscience whereby they you might be true Christians for all these errors but we now cannot be so If this be your meaning then you graunt vs our Assumption against which all your dispute here is bent You graunt it I say That the whole doctrine as it is by law in England is sufficient to make a perticuler man a true Christian Secondly wee now erre not in these poincts of simplicitie but of wilfulnes and malice Say you so Speake that plaine then Our whole assemblies all and euery of our assemblies of wilfulnes and of a conuicted conscience Are you sure of this Doe you knowe euery mans heart and conscience so well If you doe then you say somwhat indeed But you are then neere as wise as God himselfe to know mens hearts so perfectly whose faces you neuer saw You will say you know diuers whom you dare say are conuicted in coÌ„science That is much also to affirme But if you doe that serueth not your turne vnlesse all be so conuicted Christ knew a great many in the Church of the Iewes yea of the learnedst and chiefest in authoritie that were conuicted in conscience that he was the Christ who blaspheamed in denying him And yet the Assemblies then where not conuicted they still were true Churches Wherefore in this saying if you say to the purpose you then affirme the Third generall poinct that I noted in you at the beginning of this my last Reply That euery soule in England is conuicted in conscience But here I maruell that you say Maister Hus and others of the holy Martirs did heare and say Masse till their dying day Also that others did acknowledge the Popes supremacie I aske you doe you meane that they held and vsed the Popish Masse according to all the abominations that are in it If you thinke so then surely neither Hus nor any of the rest were holy Martirs For therin are founde errors plainely fundamental which of them selues abolish from Christ They are not to be compared to our publike errours now in England The like I say of the Popes supremacy If you thinke any of the Martirs acknowledged it in the large and ample meaning therof as the Popish Doctors doe set it down Then verily neither were they any Martirs The booke of Acts and Monuments whither you send vs affirmeth not that they held these errours in the largest and grossest sort It may be therefore they held manie and greuious errors of ignorance both in the Popish Masse and in the supremacy which might neuerthelesse stand with Christ crucifyed And so they might be were holy Martirs But I affirme that according to the damnable grossenes of the very Papists they neither did nor could hold them Therefore in these instances you say nothing to vs nor against the question in hand Further you said before in the beginning of your desence of this Exception * Pag. 13. That Master Cranmer Ridley Latimer and the rest of the Martirs then neither had them selues nor ioyned in spirituall communion with such as had the Prelacy and Ministery now pleaded for Now I see you make no conscience of vntruthes yea you are bold to auouch open and known falsehoods Did not Maister Cranmer hold himselfe for Archbishop still and that hee was by the Pope vniustly and vnsufficiently deposed and by Queene Mary forcibly restreyned from it Did he euer repent of holding that Office till his death Also did not Ridley stand vpon his right to the Bishoprick of London though ready to die Latimer though he renounced his Bishoprick yet he kept his Ministerie and neuer repented him of it Philpot neuer misliked hâ—s Arch-deaconry Yea when he refused bloudy Bonner Yer he appealed to his ordinary the Bishop of Winchester The like minde is to be seene in Bishop Farrar And generally whosoeuer were Ministers then of the Prelates ordination they neuer renounced it though they died Martirs Thus appeareth your bould vntruth in this behalfe Further in your Sixt answer Pag. 16. First you will not see what I meane in saying That these outward orders bee not of the foundation simply I meant not at all of the very * 1 Cor. 15.2 3 4. Rom. 4.25 1. Cor. 3.10 11 12 13 14. foundation neither are they Secondly you aske if our outward orders vnder Christ be not fundamentall aswell as the Iewes vnder the Law I answer neither were the Iewes outward orders of the very foundation without which they could not be saued Thirdly you aske how Corah c. differing from Moses and Aron only about the Priesthood and Ministerie were separated from and damned I answer not that the matter was fundamentall but the Manner was rebellious with consciences a thousand times conuicted and so donne with a high hand against God him selfe But now this considered How vainely doe you charge mee in your entrance into this Excep pa. 13. That I others of my minde goe about to iustifie these matters of order in controuersy by Cranmer Ridlies and Latimers example and their Congregations then For shame doe you not see the coÌ„trary that I call them errors I onely iustifie by their exaÌ„ple that these corruptions abolish vs not from Christ as
these be most vnnaturall additions and very manie The like doe I affirme of these externall corruptions in the Church Which my sentences you goe not about to refute but onelie with wordes with bare yea and nay and no more Mr Iohnsons I. REASON against the former Assumption with Mr Iacobs Replies to the same Hauing before noted 3. Exceptions out of their doctrine and booke alleadged we nowe proceede to shewe the weakenes of their Assumption aforesaid by these 9. Reasons following REASON I. THat which ioyneth Christ and Antichrist togeather can not make a true Christian 2 Cor. 6.14 15 16. with Ezech. 43.8 and 2. Kings 17.33 34 40 41. Bvt that doth the doctrine and booke alleadged as may be seene by comparing the 35. and 36. Articles with the rest And furthermore it appeareth both by their profession which is to be seene in their booke of Cannons set foorth anno 1571. and in other their Articles Jniunctions Aduertisements c. published at other tymes and by their practize also which is to be seene in their Ministerie Worship and Church gouernement euen to this day Therefore c. H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 1. Reason THis your first Reason is thus That which ioyneth Christ and Antichrist togeather can not make a true Christian But that doth this Booke Ergo c. I say you must mende your vnproper speache that Christ and Antichrist is there ioyned togeather you meane Christ and some outward ceremonies and orders of Antichrist then so speake and say not Christ and Antichrist simply Which things yet we thinke to be Christes own as we * Pag. 12. 18. 19. shewed in the Second Exception before Therefore this reason is answered as the last Exception before The Swanne is blacke of his bill Ergo the Swan is blacke and my brother hath a wodden legge Therfore my brother is a wodden man So here this booke ioyneth Christ and some orders of Antichrist Therefore it ioyneth Christ and Antichrist togeather which are most fonde conclusions Furthermore the scriptures alleadged 2 Cor. 6. Ezek 43. 2. Kings 17. are wholy mismatched the ioyning there forbidden is vnto such idolatrie as can not stande by any meanes with Christian faith and breaketh most directlie the First commandment Our transgression your selues do iudge to be but against the Second and such as hath stood and may stand togeather with true faith as in Maister Cranmer c. * Namely the Idolaters in those places spoken of They did not so much as professe the written lawe to be their rule neither for outwarde orders nor their inward doctrines of faith But your selues knowe we professe and practise that namely so as is shewed before in the Seconde “ Pag. 11. 1. 18. Exception Therfore to applie those scriptures in this vnto vs is your great sinne euen against the third Commaundment which is your common custome as all doe see and pitie viz. To take the name of God in vaine by misusing his worde F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 1. Reason HIs answere here is First concerning the Proposition of this reason then concerning the Assumption Concerning the Proposition First he saith Our speach is vnproper that Christ and Antichrist is there amongst them ioyned togeather Secondly he taketh vpō him to expound our words and meaning to be thus Christ and some outward ceremonies and orders of Antichrist To this we answere First that it is meete that we not he expound our owne meaning whiche togeather with the proprietie of the speech will afterwards appeare in our defence of the Assumption against his answere thereto His answere therefore concerning the Assumption is this First That the things among them which we charg to be of Antichrist they thinke to be Christes owne For proofe whereof here ferreth vs to his answere to our Second exception going before whether also we referre the Reader for answere to him againe Secondly forgetting him selfe he graunteth that in deed they be orders of Antichrist yet that they are but as the blacknes of the Swannes bill to the rest of the body Well then by his owne confession they are of Antichrist and therefore not Christes owne as before he saide and laboured to prooue Thus at once both he contradicteth him selfe and ouerthroweth that which he answered * Pag. 1◠before to our Second exception This were sufficient to manifest their deceiptfull and euill dealing But that it may more fullie appeare specially seeing bee would dazell the peoples eyes with these mincing wordes of some outward ceremonies orders of Antichrist comparing them with the blacknes of the swans bill as if they were but a fewe and of small moment Therefore will we reckon vp some of their Antichristian enormities and abhominations for it vere infinite to nomber them all And then let the Reader iudge of his inswere and their estate whether it be not more like the blacke Rauen with a white bill then the white Swanne with a blacke Sorie we are that we should thus trouble the Reader or our selues specially considering that alreadie we haue mencioned diuers of the particulars following But seeing we are constreyned herevnto by their slie and colourable answere in this place therefore can we not but doe it for the clearer manifestation of the trueth better discouering of their deceiptfulnes In which respects we intreate the Reader also to take in good parte and duely to weigh the repetition and recapitulation following Antichristian abominations yet reteyned in England 1 The cōfusion of al sortes of people in the bodye of their Church euen the most polluted and their seede beeing members thereof 2 The offices and callinges of Arch L. Bishops 3 Lord Bishops 4 Suffragans 5 Prelates Chauncellours 6 Deanes 7 Subdeanes 8 Prebendaries 9 Cannons 10 Petty cannons 11 Chaunters 12 Virgerers 13 Pistlers 14 Gospellers 15 Queristers men and boyes 16 Organistes 17 Organ Flowers 18 Arch deacons 19 Subdeacons 20 Deacons or half priests 21 Priestes 22 Parsons 23 Vicars 24 Curates 25 Vagrant Mercinarie Preachers 26 Churchwardens 27 Clerkes and Sexions 28 Chaplaynes 29 Doctors of Diuinitie 30 Bachelours of Diuini 31 Doctors and 32 Proctors in the Prelates courtes 33 Commissaries 34 Officialls 35 Registers 36 Summoners with the rest of that Antichristian and viperous generation 37 Their Ministration of the word Sacramentes gouernment of their church by voriue of the offices aforesaid 38 The titles of Primate Metropolitane Lordes grace Lordship c. ascribed to the Prelates 39 The inferior Prelates swearing obedience to the Metropoliticall seas of Cāturburie York 40 The inferiour Ministers when they enter into the Ministerie promising obedience to the prelats their ordināces and when they are inducted to benefices confirminge it with their oath 41 The Deacons and Priests presentations to a Lorde Bishoppe by an Archdeacon 42 Their receyuing of orders of the Prelates or their Suffraganes 43 Their Pontificall or Booke of consecratinge Bishops and of ordering Priestes Deacons taken
Thirdly as the Pagans Idolatrie breaking the First commaundement cannot stand with true christian faith so neither can the idolatrie and false worship of Antichrist breaking the seconde To that of Maister Cranmer c is alreadie answered in pag. 13. wherevnto may bee added that their case nowe is nothing so as theirs was then both for that they suffered to death for the trueth which they sawe And because the things nowe controuerted were not then so called into question and conuinced against them by the scriptures as nowe they haue ben against these neither were then by them so resisted and persecuted as they are by these men now adayes euen vnto bandes bannishment and death it selfe Otherwise we might iustifie the callings and estate of the Monkes and Fryars and of the most Popish Priestes and Prelates and the hauing communion with them in that estate because diuers such haue ben Martirs and layd downe their liues for the trueth which they sawe who yet neuer doubted of the lawfulnes of their callings and estate in this behalfe which then were not so called into question nor convinced by the scriptures to bee vnlawfull as since they haue bene 4. Fourthlie as there is a double Jdolatrie and false worship the one against the First commaundement when any haue others besides the true God for their God the other against the Second commaundment when anie hauing the true God for their God yet worship him not as hee hath commaunded but after the inventions and prescriptions of men So also these scriptures alleadged and the whole course of the word of God condempneth the ioyning and hauing fellowship with either of these aswell this which is against the Second commaundement as that whiche is against the First See the Reasons alleadged by the Apostle * 2 Cor. 6.14 c. Are they not stronge and weightie against ioyning togeather righteousnes and vnrighteousnes light and darknesse Christ and Beliall whether it be in the breach of the First or Second commaundement Saieth not the Lord there That his Church is his Temple in which he dwelleth and Walketh and therefore requireth of them that they be his people his sonnes and daughters separated from the world and touching no vncleane thing whether it be of Antichrist against the Second or of the Heathen against the First commaundement Ezech. 43.8 And touching the place of Ezekiell who seeth not that he speaketh directlie of the breach of the Second commandement in ioyning togeather in the worship of the true God their thresholdes with Gods thresholds and their postes with Gods postes that is their inuentions with Gods ordinances which though it bee done to the name and for the seruice of the true God yet sayth the Prophet Jt is abomination in the sight of God and they that doe so worship him set a wall betweene God them selues and defyle his holy Name with their abominations Loe here the vse and fruict of ioyning togeather the inuentions of men chieflie of Antichrist that man of sinne with the ordinances of God in his worshipp and seruice As Maister Iacob and his complices like this so let them holde on in pleading for it and practizing of it The third place alleadged is out of 2 King 17. where also it is most plaine 2 King 17. that the scripture speaketh of the breach of the Second cōmaundement For there is set down that the Samaritans worspipped the b Vers 28.32 41. same God and after c Vers 26.27 29 33 34 40. the same manner that the Israelites of the Tenne Tribes did that were carryed from thence That is they worshipped the b Vers 28.32 41. true God but c Vers 26.27 29 33 34 40. not as hee had commaunded but by hauing Images of sundrie sortes by whiche they thought God was represented as d Exod. 32 4. of olde they thought of the calfe that Aaron made and by other inuentions deuised by the Israelites in their defection and ioyned to Gods ordinances for the worship and seruice of him That this was the sinne of those Samaritans against the Second commandement will appeare by cōparing togeather with this chapter these scriptures following to which we referre the Reader Ezra 4.1 2. with Exod. 20.4 5 6. and 32.1 4 5 6. Jug 17.2 3 4 5 13 Ezek 20.39 Hosea 2.16 Amos 5.21 22 23. 8.14 1 Kings 12.27 and 18.21 and 21.29 and 22.12 24. Esay 10.11 Iohn 4.19 20 25 26 29 30. By these also as by that of Ezekiell likewise may appeare howe false it is that hee further saith They did not so much as professe the written law to be their rule neither for outwarde order nor their inwarde doctrines of faith Jf this were so howe could it bee true which Ezechiell sayeth of them of whom he speaketh that they set their postes and threshalls by Gods postes and Treshalls that is their inuentions by Gods ordinances Howe also was it that the Samaritans spoken of 2 King 17. sacrificed to the true God euen the Lord God of the Iewes offering vnto him burnt offringes and meate offringes and peace offringes Or howe came it that they still vsed circumcision and weyted for the Messias to come as he was promised in the writen worde of God yea knowing also and beleeuing not onely that the Messias would come which is called Christ but also that when he came he would tell them all things The corinthian infidels in deed as the rest of the Heathen knewe not the true God nor his written worde But it was not so with the Samaritanes or Tenne tribes of Jsraell fallen from Judah as is euident by the scriptures and reasons before alleadged To that which he next addeth to their professiō practise Referring vs to his answere in pag. 11 12 18 to our Second Exception going before wee haue there answered alreadie pag. 12. 13. and will not therfore repeate it Onely this we adde moreouer That seeing the publique constitution of their Assemblies and estate of their Ministers people therein is a most impious transgression of the Second commandement which the Lord himselfe calleth “ Num. 15.39 Reue. 11.8 17.1 2 3 4. spirituall whoredome against him yea grieuous iniquitie and hatred of him threatning †Exod. 20. to visit it vpon the Fathers and children so remayning to the Third and Fourth generation Therefore both by it are the truthes which they professe made frustrate vnto thē in this estate Neither will it helpe them to pretend that it is their error in iudgement For what abomination is there that might not thus be coloured But seeing their publike profession practize is at the best a ioyning of Christ and Antichrist togeather as hath bene shewed before therefore neither can they by the worde of God be deemed in this estate to bee true Christians on true constituted Churches And the Scriptures applyed to proue this consequent are fitlie alleadged as hath bene seene Falsly therefore it is that
3 3 11. c. and 17 1 2 3 4 5. and 14.8 9 10 11. the spirituall Babilon notwithstanding any truthes she holdeth yet is so vnsanctifyed and abominable as shee is become a cage of all vncleane and hatefull birdes and that all her children and Marchants that will not departe out of her shall receyue of her plagues and damnation and drinke of the wine of Gods wrath yea of the pure wyne which is powred into the cup of his wrath and be tormented in fire and brimstone before the holy Angells and before the Lamb for euermore Loe here their fearfull estate which this man will needes accompt holy and acceptable before God H. JACOB his 2. Reply to the 5. Reason IN this your defence of your Fifth Reason you mislike that J call it an absurd comparison Where you affirme that the golden vesses of the Jewes were as available to sanctifie the Babilonians as the truthes of the Gospell which wee hold are to sanctifie vs. In deed your owne wordes be holden and receiued in the spirituall Babilon By which termes you meane vs of England I trow But marke sir Is not this grosse sophistery againe Is not this childish vanitie open beggerie and crauing of that which is the whole question that is That our Churches are spirituall Babilon and as deepely infected in Babilonish impietie as those old Caldeans If they were so infected I graunt in deed your Reason would follow But seeing it is the question And seeing we professe our selues true Christians by those truthes of the Gospell which we hold and as by Gods grace we are indeed Say I not well that this is an absurd Comparison Yes Maister Iohnson it is a most * To match those outward vessells of no sanctity of them selues with our inward doctrins of saluation impious absurd sencelesse comparison void of common reason And it inwrappeth Maister Cranmer Maister Ridley c. within the same Iniurions Yea irreligious consequence likewise All that you haue of allusions and alluding betwene the Tipicall and spirituall Babilon are meere delusions and vaine cauils Proue vs first to be spirituall Babilon Or els you fight with your shadow So that still I say those Scriptures quoted of Dan. 5. c. As also all the rest here packed togeather in your Margen they are miserably and desperately abused according as I rightly referred you to my censure to your First Reason which for all your wordes you haue not refuted The very same I say of your other Two scriptures towards the end Pro. 9.17 c. Reu. 18.1 c. As for Ezek. 43.8 I answered it before †Pag. 34. in your First Reason Maister IOHNSONS VI. Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON VI. THe Samaritans those counterfett children of Abraham Jsaack and Iacob did publiquelie professe that most excellent doctrine of the Messias to come the trueth of which doctrine howe powerful it was to saluation the Scriptures testifie yet doeth our Sauiour Christ repute them false worshippers of God because their worship was a mixt worship framed after the inventions of men and traditions of their Forefathers Therefore sayth Christ vnto them Yee worship that which ye knowe not we worship that which we knowe for saluation is of the Iewes By which wordes of Christ it plainely appeareth that although at that time some professed such truthes which otherwise were auaylable vnto saluatiō yet none that were false worshippers of God could truely challendge vnto them selues in such estate the benefite of those truthes but they onely which were the true Church and people of God to whom the Oracles of God were committed and to whom the Couenantes and seruice of God did appertayne such as were at that tyme not the Samaritans but the Jewes and they whiche helde the faith of the Iewes wherevppon not the Samaritanes but the Iewes were then by Christ accounted the true worshippers of GOD and heires of saluation John 4.22 compared with verse 20.25 29. and with 2. King 17 24. In the like manner the people of these Ecclesiasticall assemblies standing subiect to a counterfett Ministerie and worship of God being also commingled togeather of all sortes of people Though they professe some truthes which otherwise are auailable to saluation yet can not in such estate by the word of God he deemed true Christians or true Churches Neither can so standing challendge vnto them selues the benefit of those true doctrines which they professe because God hath not made his promise vnto anie false Church or worshippers of him neither committed vnto anie such his holy things to witt his word prayer Sacramentes Censures c. But he hath made his promise committed these things only to his true Church and people which worship him aright and yeeld obedidience to his Gospell keeping whatsoeuer he hath commaunded them Wherevpon it followeth that such people onely are true Christians and true churches of Christ to whom the promises holy things apperteyne and not to the people and Ecclesiasticall assemblies of England neither anie such abiding in false worship or false constitution of a church as is aforesaide H. JOCOB his 1. Reply to the 6. Reason THis your 6. Reason is The Samaritans beleeuing that Messias should come Iohn 4.25 were as neare saluation as we of England are But they were false worshippers for all that Ergo so are we for all our holy doctrines beleeued according to that Booke of Articles I deny the Proposition The Samaritans might knowe by hearsay and beleeue the Messias should come and Baalam did know it Nom. 24.17 and the Deuils doe now know and beleue Iam. 2.17 Yet none of these beleeued in him It followeth not therefore that they were as nigh saluation as wee of England In a worde there is a Reason manifest These Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idols with the God of Israel 2. Ki. 17. which wholy destroyed the trueth in them though they did reteyne some memoriall amongst them of Messias to come Wherfore here take the Second Answer to the First Reason before * Pag. 25. But I will help them with an Obiection surely one fitter then all these Obiection The Isralites vnder Ieroboam at Dan and Bethell serued not Pagan Idols but the true God after their own deuises which yet resembled the ordinances of Ierusalem 2. King 12.32 Amos. 4.4 Howbeit they were false worshippers only for their false Ministery and outward false worship for all that they beleeued in the God of Ierusalem otherwise rightly Ergo so are wee of England only for our false Ministerie and outward worship Answere To this wee aunswere also what additions of deuices and how grosse Idolatrie they held it appeareth not But surely it seemeth farre grosser and filthier then the worst is with vs But yet this appeareth cleerelie that the conscience of euery of them euen of the simpliest must needes be conuicted that Ierusalem was the only place and Arons line the
only Priests †My meaning was the Leuits were not of Aarons line but the Priests only Leuits Therfore they could not be indeed true worshippers nor within the couenant nor neere to saluation when they all openly rebelled and forsooke them desperatly whom the Lord had so expresly chosen Now our assemblies throughout England haue not their consciences so conuicted in the Hyerarchie and Ceremonies Ergo wee may be in the coueuant which they were not for all our corruptions F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 6. Reason THis our 6. Reason he neither propounded as we did nor aunswereth directlie and soundlie vnto anie part of it But that the nakednes of his answere and light of the trueth may better appeare we will propound the Reason more shortlie in a Sillogisme thus The people and assemblies whose Ecclesiasticall constitution is such as to them in that estate the Couenantes holy things and seruice of God doe not apperteyne they can not in such constitution by the worde of God be deemed true Christians or true Churches whatsoeuer truthe they professe besides But such is the Ecclesiasticall constitution of the people and assemblies of Englande as vnto them in that estate the Couenauntes holy things seruice of God doe not apperteyne Therefore the people and Assemblies of England can not in that constitution by the word of God be deemed true Christians or true Churches whatsoeuer truthes they professe besides The Proposition none will denie The Assumption is proued thus The people and Assemblies whose Ecclesiasticall constitution is such as they worship God after a false manner neuer appointed by him self nor approued in his word their constitution is such as vnto them in that estate the couenaunts holy things and seruice of God doe not apperteyne But such is the Ecclesiasticall constitution of the people and Assemblies of England as they worship God after a false manner neuer appointed by him selfe nor approued in his word Therefore the Ecclesiasticall constitution of the people and Assemblies of Englande is such as vnto them in that estate the Couenaunts holie things and seruice of God doe not apperteyne The Proposition was proued by the example of the Samaritans and Christes speach and sentence of them in such estate Ioh. 4. and 2 King 17 Whervnto he answereth nothing to anie purpose saue that what he saith is against him selfe For where he graunteth That the Samaritans and Balaam knewe and beleeued the Messias should come yea and that the Deuills knowe and beleeue there is a God and that Iesus is the Christ the holy one of God Who seeth not that most excellent truthes may be acknowledged and yet they which so professe be not therefore in their estate true Christians or true Churches to whom the Couenauntes holie things and seruice of God apperteyne Where next he saith The Samaritans beleeued not in the Messias it will be heard for him to prooue it seeing he taketh beleefe in Christ so as it is had in the spirituall Babylon and her daughters and seeing also the Samaritans professed and beleened not onely that the Messiah should come but euen he which is called Christ that when he came he would declare vnto them all things Jn so much as when Jesus was come had spoken but to a woman of Samaria the scripture witnesseth that manie of the Samaritans of that citie beleeued in him for the saying of the woman which testified he hath tolde me all thinges that euer I did Ioan 4.25 26 29 30 39. Thirdly where he saith The Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idolls with the God of Israell which wholy destroyed the trueth in them which they held By this againe it is euident euen in his owne confession Both that such things may be ioyned with the doctrines of trueth as in that estate they which professe those truthes can not be iudged true Christians or true churches to whom the promises and holy things of God doe belong And that therefore also the * See further for the answer of this in Pag. 4. Proposition of his principall and maine Argument first propounded is not generall but of necessitie admitteth limitations So as then his maine defence falleth to the ground as alreadie we haue noted both in the beginning of this writing in the answere to that Proposition afore saide and againe in the defence of our Fourth Reason a little before Moreouer in that he sayeth the Samaritans ioyned Heathenish Idols with the God of Israell 2. King 17. If he meane that they worshipped the Idols them selues 2. King 17. sacrificing to them and accompting them to be Gods as well as the God of Israell and so brake the First commaundement as before he affirmed in his answere to our First Reason then we take it that here againe hee is deceyued as there we haue shewed The scripture saieth Pag. 30. they worshipped sacrifized to the Lord God of Israell So as their sinne was against the Second commaundement in that worshipping the true God they did it in and by those Images as also by other deuices of their owne and traditions of their predecessours That this was their estate and sinne besides that it appeareth in that chapter alleadged it is also most plainlie sett downe first by them selues in that booke of Ezra Ezra 4.1 2. where they speake vnto the Iewes of the captiuitie that builded the Temple saying We will buylde with you for wee seeke the Lord your God as ye doe and we haue sacrificed vnto him since the tyme of Esar Haddon King of Asshur which brought vs vp hither Then also betweene Christ and the woman of Samaria Joh. 4. where it is manifest that the “ Ioh. 4.20 21 22 23 24 25 29 30. contention betweene the Iewes and the Samaritans was not whether onely the true God was to be worshipped but both of them agreeing in that whether the solemne place of his worship was in Ierusalem or in the mount of Samaria c. Lastlie by this mans owne confession when he sayth in this place Pag 49. that the Israelites vnder Ieroboam at Dan and Bâ—thel serued not Pagan Idolls but the true God after their owne deuices For the scripture testifieth “ 2. King 17.28 32 33. that the Samaritans worshipped the same God and after the same maner that the Nations did which were caried from thence Nowe the nations that were carryed from thence were the tenns Tribes that fel away from Iudah to Ieroboam which likewise feared * 1. King 12.27 28 29 30 31. with 2. King 17.32 33 40 41. the Lord serued their Jmages that is God in and by their Images as nowe also the Samaritans did that were come in their steede Hetherto of his answere which may seeme to concerne the Proposition of the latter Sillogisme The Assumption was shewed by this that these assemblies being commingled togeather of all sortes of people they haue also for the worship of God among them a counterfett
Apostle to be separated from neither can in that case by the word of God be deemed true Christians H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 9. Reason THis your last Reason is Separat frō thē that teach otherwise then the truth 1 Tim. 6 3 4 5. We holding those Articles doe teach diuerse thinges in the Hyerarchie c. that be otherwise then is truth Therefore we must be separated from and consequently we are no true Christians This is a falacy also Separate from such Ergo separate wholy See my 1. and 2. Reply afore to the third Exception also the Answer to the two last Reasons of all the 7. and 8. We graunt therefore so farr forth as we hold otherwise then trueth so farr separate from vs but not any farther at all not wholly or absolutly And so the Apostle heere meaneth Wherefore briefly Because you proue vs not wholy to deny the trueth nor fundamentally nor obstinatly peruersly and desperatly any parte thereof like those Iewes Act. 19.8 whom Paul separated from which he did not from all other Iewes Act. 13.14 and 16.3 and 21.23 24 26. and 3.1 Therefore you ought not wholy to separate from vs Neither to condemne vs wholy as abolished from Christ no more then Maister Cranmer and Ridley were with their Congregations in King Edwards time And thus our Assumption in the beginning standeth firme The doctrine in the booke of Articles is sufficient to make a true Christian The contrarie whereof is such a Paradox Conclusion as hath not bene heard of till this day All reformed Churches in Europe doe and haue alwayes held otherwise Themselues * Mai. Barrow Mai. Penry Mai. Iohnson heretofore haue acknowledged and professed it The holy Martirs that liued in King Edwardes dayes and died in Queene Maries dayes must bee otherwise cut of from Christ who were true Christians by vertue of this doctrine and the practice thereof or verily not at all But now it is wonder what extreame passion hath driuen them to this deniall Surely they see that it conuinceth flatly as indeed it doth their peremptorie separation And therefore rather then they would seeme to haue erred in so mayne poinct wee cannot but thinke that meere desperatnes hath driuen them to it Neuerthelesse all this we leaue to the Lorde with the iudgment thereof who hath the hearts of all men in his hand not only to search the seacrets but also to turne and dispose them euen as it pleaseth him F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 9. Reason VNto our Nineth Reason aforesaide he answereth That it is a Fallacy separate from such Ergo separate wholy But howe shewes he any fallacie to be in our Reason Hee bids vs see his answere aboue to our third Exception also his answeres to the two last Reasons of all Well we haue seene them and finde nothing there but against him self as there hath bene shewed So this Reason then as the rest also still standes vnanswered and stronge against them And that we may not doubt but him selfe also seeth it to be so how soeuer he seemeth to pleade to the contrarie before therefore nowe he graunteth it and so yeeldes vs the cause both in expresse wordes and by not defending the 17. poinctes of false doctrine wherewith they were charged neither their owne Cannons Articles Iniunctions c. alleadged against them In expresse wordes whē he sayth they graunt that so farr foorth as they holde otherwise then trueth so farre we may and ought to separat from them Loe here what the euidence of the trueth against which they haue struggeled so longe hath now at length drawne from them The trueth is mighty and preuayleth But he addeth that we must not separate from them any further then as before not wholy or absoluteiy and so saieth he the Apostle “ 1. Tim. 3.3 here meaneth Well but let vs here knowe what this mā him self meaneth hereby If he meane that we must not for their other defectiō forsake the truthes which they holde We answere that we doe it not as him selfe knoweth and in this sence also his meaning should come nothing neare the Apostles meaning Themselues say they haue separated from the Papists yet he neither ean nor will say that they haue forsaken the “ As that ther is a God that there is three persons in the Godhead that Iesus Christ is the Sauiour of the worlde that God made heauen and earth that there shal be a resurrection of the iust and vniust truthes which the papistes held notwithstanding that they haue made separation from them But if he meane that because of the truthes which they professe therefore we should not separate from them then First he contradicteth him selfe hauing graunted that we must separate from them so far foorth as they hold otherwise then trueth Secondly he condemneth their owne practze in their separation from the Papistes notwithstanding the truthes they professe Thirdly in this sence also his meaning should come nothing neare the Apostles meaning Thus therefore it is euident both that there is no fallacie in our reason but that it is plaine and forceable against them And moreouer that he hath directly in expresse wordes yeelded vs the cause and acknowledged our separation from their assemblies ministerie worship c. And as he doeth this in expresse wordes so also he sheweth it in deed in that he leaueth without all defence as vnlawfull and to be separated from their Ministerie Worship and Gouuernement Ecclesiasticall the 17. poincts of false doctrine obiected against them and their Canons Articles Iniunctions c. mentioned both here and more particularly in the First and Second Reasons going before Which thing we wish the Reader well to obserue And because we are fallen againe into mention of the 17. poinctes of false doctrine to the end that the Reader may yet more see the deceitfulnes of his dealing and insufficiencie of all his answeres heere and before therefore it shall not bee yrke some to sett downe here before the Readers those 17. poinctes of false doctrine aforesaide specially seeing they are but short They are these as followeth Poinctes of false doctrine deliuered and spread abroad by the Writings Sermons and practise of the forward Preachers of the Parish assemblies of England with answeres to the same 1 That though the open notorious obstinate offenders be partakers of the Sacramentes yet neither the Sacramentes nor the people that ioyne with them are defiled thereby Which doctrine is contrarie to the trueth of God in these scriptures 1 Cor. 10 17. Hag. 2.14 15. 1 Cor. 5.6 and 10.28 2 Cor. 6.15 18. Gal. 5.9 Mat. 18.8 9 15 16 17 18 19. Exod. 12.43 Leuit. 15.4 5 6 7 31. and 11.24 and 23 45 46. and 19.17 Num. 5.2 3. and 19.21 22. Iosua 11.12 Ezra 6.21.22 Ier. 3.1 2 That the planting or reforming of Christes Church must tarrie for the Ciuill magistrate and may not otherwise be brought in by the word spirite of God
in the mouthes of his weakest seruantes except they haue authoritie from earthlie Princes Which doctrine is against the Kinglie power of Christ and these scriptures Mat 28.18 Actes 3.23 1 Cor. 1. 27. Psal 2.6 9 10 12. Esai 9.6 7. Zach. 4.6 and 6.12.23 Dan. 2.44 and 7.27 and 9.25 Mich. 5.7 Mat. 28.20 1 Cor. 14.27 with 1 Thes 4.8 Phil. 2.6 12. 1 Tim. 6.13 14.15 Rene. 1.5 and 14.12 and 17.14 19 16. and 20.4 3 That the true visible Church of Christ is not a separated companie of righteouse men and women from the Jdolaters and open wicked of the world but may consist of all sortes of people good bad Which doctrine is contrarie to the paterne of Christs Church throughout all the scriptures Gen. 4.26 with 6.2 Exod. 4.22 23. Leuit. 10.10 and 20.24 25 26 Psal 24.3 4. Ezra 6.21 2 Chron. 11.13 16. Nehem. 10.28 Eze. 22.26 with 44.23 Zeph. 3.4 Mat. 3.10 12. Act. 2.40 41 42. and 19.9 Rom. 12.1 8. 2 Cor. 6.17 18. 1 Pet. 2.9 10. Reu. 14.9 12. and 18.4 and 21.27 and 22.14 15. c. 4 That they may mainteyne this error of their confused order and mixture of all sortes of persons togeather they peruert the Parable of the tares Mat. 13.24 teaching that all are the Church Which doctrine is against the trueth of the scriptures yea against our Sauiours owne interpretation in the 38. verse who teacheth that by the field is meant not the Church but the world in which his Church is milatāt And as therin there is the good seede the righteous the Children of the Kingdome So there are also tares hipocrites the childrē of the wicked who as they are often espied in this life by the righteous seruauntes of God so shall they in that great day be perfectlie seuered from the godly by the Angels of God verse 38.43 This their doctrine also is against the heauenlie orders mentioned Matt. 18.8 9 15 16 17. 1 Corint 1.26.29 Actes 2.40.41 47. and 5.26 27 28. and 19 9. and 5.4 7. 2 Cor. 6.17 18. Leuit. 18.29 1 Tim. 6.5 2 Iohn verse 6.11 Reuel 2. and 3. and 14.9.12 and 18.4 and 20.4 5 That the people may tollerate and ioyne with open iniquitie in the Church vntill by the Magistrate it be redressed which doctrine is contrary to these riptures 2 Cor. 10.4 5. Mat. 28.21 Acts. 2.40 3.23 and 4.19 and 9.26 and 19.9 1 Tim. 5.22 Deu. 5.32 6 That the guiftes of interpretation and application of the Scriptures are a sufficient and lawfull calling to the ministerie c. Which doctrine is both false and Anabaptisticall contrarie to the scriptures Heb. 5.4 Rom 12.6 7 8. Leuit. 22.25 Ezek. 44.8 9 c. Num. 1.51 and 3.10 38 and 16.40 and 18.2 3 4. Act. 1.20.26 and 14.23 and 13.2.3 7 That the Church may yeelde obedience vnto other lawes cannons and traditions officers and offices then God hath prescribed in his Conenant Which doctrine is contrarie to Gen. 49.10 Mal. 6.24 Iohn 10 4 5. Ren. 14.4 and 22 18 19. Heb. 3 1 c 8 That the Church may read other mens wordes vppon a booke and offer them vp to God as their owne prayers and sacrifices in the publique Assemblies Which doctrine is contrarie to the scriptures Esai 29.13 14. Rom. 8.26 1 Cor. 14.15 Mat. 6.6.9 and 15.9 Mar. 7.7 Ephe. 4.7 8. 1 Pet. 2.5 9 That it is lawfull to ioyne with the Ministerie of dumb and Jdoll Priests and to receiue the Sacramentes at their handes Which doctrine is contrarie to Mal. 15.14 and 7.19 and 24.24 25. Iohn 10.1.5 Num. 16 5 9 24 26 39 40 c. 1 Tim 6.5.2 Iohn verse 6.11 10 That it is lawfull for a Minister of Christ to cease preaching forsake his flock at the Commaundement of a Lord Bishop Which doctrine is contrarie to 1 Cor. 9.16 Esay 62.4 6 7. Ier. 48.10 Zach. 11.17 Iohn 10.11 12 13. Actes 4.18 19 20 and 5.29 Amos 7.12 13 14 15. 2 Tim. 4.2 11 That the Church of Christ hath not alwayes power to binde and loose to receiue in and to cast out by the Keyes of the Kingdome Which doctrine is contrarie to Mat. 18.17 18. Psal 149.9 1 Cor. 5.4 5.12 Num. 5 2 3. 12 That it is lawfull for the people of God to heare notorious false prophetes in their Ministerie Which doctrine is contrarie to Deut. 18.15 Mat. 17.5 and 7.15.2 John verse 10.11 1 Cor. 10.18 Gala. 1 8 9. Reuel 14 9 10 11. and 18.4 John 10.96 13 That it is the Church and house of God the body and kingdome of Christ where he reigneth not by his own Ordinances Officers but the highest Ecclesiasticall authoritie is in the handes of strange Lordes and Antichristian Prelates who also gouerne by Romishe Cannons and not according to the lawes of Christes Testament Which doctrine and practise is condemned by Luke 19.14 27. Iohn 15.14 Rom. 6.16 Luke 22.25 26. 1 Pet. 3.2 Thes 2 3.4 Iohn 3.35.36 Reuel 9.3 and 14.9.10.11 and 19.14.15 14 That there may be a prescript Leiturgie and sett fourme of seruice in the Church framed by man which doctrine is contrarie to Deut. 5.8 Esai 29.13 14. Mat. 15.9 and 7.6.7 Gal. 3.15 Iohn 4.24 Rom. 8.26.27 Ephe. 4.7.8 15 That an Antichristian Prelate notwithstanding his dignitie as it is called spirituall may be a Ciuill Magistrate and obeyed of the people as their lawfull gouernour Which doctrine is contrarie to Rom. 13.1 c. Mat. 20.25 26. Mar. 10.42 43. Luke 22.25 26. Reuel 14.9 10 11. and 17.18 16 That men may giue the titles of Christ Jesus vnto these sonnes of men and his mortall enemies to call them their Arch and Lord Bishops Reuerend Fathers c. Which doctrine is contrarie to Mat. 23 8 9 10. Esai 42.8 and 48.11 Pro. 17.15 and 24.24 Esai 5.20 2 Cor. 6.14.17 17 That it is lawfull for a Minister of Christ to be mainteyned in his ministerie by the goods of wicked and vnbeleeuers by Iewish and Popishe tythes and offeringes Which doctrine is contrarie to Prou. 27.26 27. 1 Cor. 9.13 14. Phil. 4.10.18 Gal. 6.6 Rom. 15.27 Heb. 7.12 These are the 17 poinctes which were mentioned before in the proofe of this reason which the aduersarie hath left altogeather vnanswered as he hath done also their owne Cannons Articles and Iniunctions which are to be seene in their printed bookes And thus is he driuen againe againe whether he will or not to yeeld vs the cause That which he addeth in the next place of their not wholy denying the trueth nor fundamentally nor obstinately peruerslie and desperatlie any parte thereof is answered before in the defence of our second Exception and of our sixt and seauenth Reasons Nowe when he next saith That they are not herein like those Iewes Act. 19.9 whom Paule separated from which he did not from all other Iewes Actes 13.14 and 16 3 and 21 23 24 26. and 3.1 Firste wee aske What if they be not in all respectes like vnto those
Christ be not a company of people called and separated out from the world by the worde of God and ioyned togeather in fellowship of the Gospell by voluntary profession of the faith and obedince of Christ And whether the present ecclesiasticall assemblies of this Land be such or no. 5 Whether the Sacraments beeing seales of the righteousnes which is by faith may be deliuered to any other then to the faithfull and their seed or in any other ministery and manner then is appoincted by Iesus Christ the Apostle and high Priest of our profession And whether they bee not otherwise administred in the Cathedrall and parishionall assemblies of England at this day 6 Whether their booke of Common prayer with the Feastes Fasts and Holy dayes stinted prayers and Leiturgy prescribed therein and vsed in these assemblies be the true worship of God commaunded in his word or the deuise or inuention of man for Gods worship and seruice 7 Whether all people and Churches without exception bee not bound in Religion only to receiue and submit vnto that ministerie worship and order which Christ as Lord and King hath giuen and appoyncted to his Church Or whether in Religion any may receiue or ioyne vnto another ministery worship and order deuised by man for the seruice of God And consequently whether they which ioyne to the present ecclesiasticall ministerie worship and order of these cathedrall and parishionall assemblies can bee assured by the word of God that they ioyne vnto the former appoincted by Christ and not to the latter deuised by man euen the man of sinne for the worship and seruice of God Vnto these questions and the particulers thereof for the causes aforesaid we desire their direct answer with proofes of their answers from the scriptures according to which word if they speake not as wee said before so we say againe with the “ Esa 8.20 Prophet Esay It is because there is no light in them And now to conclude whereas this man being not able to answer our Reasons as hath bene declared yet would in the ende of his writting fasten vpon vs some strange passion yea and meere desperatnes for separating from them and answering of them as we haue done We leaue it the godly and discrete Reader to iudge by that which hath bene said on both parts whether it bee not themselues which are taken with a strange passion and driuen there unto by meere desperatnes when as to mainteyne their estate they will haue the scriptures to fall as hath bene * See the answer to our second Exceptiō and 7. Reason c. seene in their answeres before yea and exalt the Church and Magistrate aboue Christ himselfe euen flesh and blood aboue God blessed for euer But for this and oll their vnrighteous dealing against the truth and people of God we leaue them to the Lord who searcheth the hearts tryeth the raynes euen to giue euery man according to his wayes and according to the frute of his workes That is to them that by continuance in weldoing seeke glorie and honor and immortalitie eternall life But vnto them that are contentious and disobey the trueth and obey vnrighteousnes indignation and wrath Jer. 17.10 with Rom. 2.6 7 8. H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 9. Reason IN this your defence of the last Reason you mislike that I say it is a fallacy and you say I shew none Marke what I say Euery one of your Reasons I say euery one is a very proper fallacy and an artificiall parte of Sophisterie as by my seuerall answers to them may appeare Your First Reason is called in the scholes Fallacia ab co quod est secandum quid ad simpliciter prouing a thing to be simply by that which is but after a sort The Second is the very same The Thirde Fallacia aequinocationis A fallacie of Ambiguity The Fourth is the very same The Fift is petitio principij a begging of the question The Sixth the very same fallacie that was in the First and Second Reasons The Seauenth Eight and Ninth haue all the Fallacy of Equiuocation and if you will the same with that in your First Second and Sixt Reasons also Further where you say that here I graunt you the cause it is very absurd The Apostle 1 Tim. 6.3 4 5. saying separate frō such hath a two fould sence Either such as teach otherwise then the trueth fundamentally and then separate wholly Or not fundamentally but erring only in poincts lesse then the foundation and theise diuersely also Either presumptuously obstinately and of a desparate conscience and then if that apeate separate from such wholly Or els erring in simplicitie and of ouersight and former preiudice from such separate not wholly but only from the very error or errors in no wise from their Christian communion and societie seeing theise are true Christians Seing therefore our corruptions of the Praelacie and Ceremonies be of these latter sort which thing hetherto you haue not nor cannot ouerthrowe and withall you must vtterly ouerthrowe Maist Cranmer and the rest of the Martirs their Christianitie likewise Therefore wee in England by the grace of God are still true Christians and you ought so to acknowledge vs as you will answer vnto God All which you may doe and yet touch no parte of our Ecclesiasticall corruptions at all to giue allowance vnto them And in all this there is no contradiction with my selfe it is but your distempered conceipt that seemeth contrarie Neither is our absolute departure from the Papists hereby anie whit impeached Wee haue iustlie forsaken them cleane because by their very profession doctrine wee cannot esteeme them true Christians neither in case of saluation while they so remaine but indeed very Antichristes as the scripture proueth Which thing also if you say of vs you say falslie it is our present question and you doe not proue it nor euer can doe As for your 17. poincts of false doctrine which you most falsly lay to our chardge what haue I to doe with them I list not to meddle at this prsent but with that which wee haue in hand namely to iustifie that our publike booke of Articles of Religion so farre forth as that it erreth not fundamentally As it doth not conteyneth sufficient to make a true Christian Against the which hetherto you haue brought nothing worth the hearing as we haue seene After you would proue vs to be like those Iewes Act. 19.9 whom Paul separated from But without all good reason They were not so many but they were casely certified of the truth that Paul preached but how infinitly many moe are there in this land that know nothing of this controuersie 2. Secondly Paul was better able to conuince them by the scriptures and did more effectually and apparantly then you doe or can our whole Realme 3. Thirdly how many learned are there in this lande that haue many probable and seeming reasons and alleadge them publish
them for the Praelacie against you and are vnanswered And yet will you say they are cōuicted and those infinite others depending on them I say conuicted aswell as those Iewes What if these speake euill of that which you hold for truth but they hold to be errors and schisme Are they all yea all the Land therefore abolished from Christ Might not all this at least be said of the whole estate of the Iewes in Christes time and after aswell yet they ceased not to bee Churches why then are you so partiall against vs Lastly you would shew Reasons why the Apostles wholy separated not from the Iewes Synagogues after Christ Act. 13.14 c. Which you will in no wise haue to serue vs. But alas for all your Exceptions against vs you haue neuer a reason but one and that is petitio principij That wee were neuer separated from the world nor set in the way order of Christ but in the confusion and defection of Antichrist whose Ministerie c. were neuer the ordinances of God c. This is but crauing the whole question And I haue refuted these quarelles in a short writing hereafter following about the comparison of the Ministerie with Mariage which yet you haue no leysure to answer this whole three yeares togeather and vpwarde And further you doe not shew any vtter and absolitte separation from the whole Church of the Iewes a great while after Christ but the contrarie is seene Act. 21.23 24 26. though from some one or two synagogues they separated after full experience of ther obstinate and malitious resistance of the truth which we deny not Touching the Conclusion IN the conclusion of my former Replie to proue your vtter separation from vs a Paradox First I alleadged all the reformed Churches For who knoweth not but they all hold Communion with vs as Churches of God yet you dare either deny this or vtterlie peruert it Yow tell vs of your Answers to Maister Cartwright and Maister Hildersham that are vnanswered If they by like to this your answer here verely they doe wisest in yeelding silence to such friuolus and wandring wordes Secondly I alleadged your selues to haue acknowledged heretofore That our publique doctrine allowed would and did make many of vs true Christians You too shamefully deny it And say you are for witnessing against it imprisoned banished c. Whereto I answere that if for these things you are troubled I know none can pittie you And because you say none of you euer acknowledged it I will therefore repeat your owne wordes Mr. BARROW in his last answer in writing to Mr. Gifford intituled A few obseruations to the reader of Mr. Giff last Reply Sect. 4. saith thus The next calumniations whereby Mr Gifford indeuoreth to bring vs into hatred with the whole Lande is That we condemne all the persons both men and women of England which are not of our minde and pluck them vp as tares wherein me thinkes he doeth vs open wrong if not against his owne cōscience yet against our expresse writings euery where c. Haue we not commended the faith of the Englishe Martirs deemed them saued notwithstanding the false offices and great corruptions in the worship they exercised not doubting but the mercy of God through their syncere faith to Iesus Christ extended and superabonnded aboue all their sinnes seene and vnseene And what nowe should let that we should not haue the same hope where the same pretious faith in synceritie simplicitie is found So that they neither neglect to search out the trueth nor despise the trueth when they see it c. Afterwards in the same Section The faithfull seruants of Christ denying the whole constitution and gouernment of this Church of England may iustlie deny the people whilest they remayne in that constitution to bee members of a true constituted Church yet hereby not condemne them with any such peremptory sentence as Maister Gifford suggesteth to cut them of from Gods election Nota. From Christ or from Christ Mr. PENRIE in his confession of faith published in writing a litle before his death saith thus The trueth of doctrine touching the holy Trinitie touching the Natures and Offices of Christe Justifying faith Sacramentes Eternall life and the rest established by her Maisties Lawes and professed by her selfe their Honors and such as haue knowledge in the Assemblies of this lande J acknowledge from my heart to be such as if J mainteyned not the vnitie and helde not the communion of the same doctrine with them in these poinctes J could not possibly be saued For out of the Communion of the true profession which her Maiestie hath established in these and the like truthes there is no hope of saluation left But ioyne notwithding with the publique worship in the assemblies of this Land I dare not for the former causes J doe moreouer willingly confesse That many both of the Teachers also of the Professors within these Parish assemblies haue so embraced this trueth of doctrine established and professed in this Land as the Lord of his infinite goodnes hath graūted thē the fauour to shew outwardly many tokens whereby in regard of the Lordes election I professe before men and Angells that I iudge them to be members of that body whereof the Sonne of God Christ Iesus is the head Onely herein the Lord be mercifull vnto them as to my self in regard of my sinnes That they are not vnder that outward forme of gouernement that Christ hath left c. And in his examination before Maister Fanshaw lately published by your selues in print he confesseth the Churches of England to be the true Churches of Christ. And what say you Maister Iohnson Haue you not affirmed this thing your selfe to me and to Maister Philips namely touching your owne selfe when you were of vs That then you doubted not but you were a true regenerate Christian. By vertue of what doctrine By extraordinarie reuelation Nay but by our publique doctrine of our Church when you stoode and continued a publique Minister of the same If you beleued so of your selfe and that truely what letteth but you may beleeue the like of many Thousands nowe Further where you say my applying of the Martirs is answered before Let the Reader iudge You shewe here that some of them misliked the Hyerarchie But it maketh stronger against you seeing for all that they them selues refused not to communicate and partake with them then as true Christians as Hoper Bale Bradford c. After where you say though the reformed Churches your selues and the Martirs haue thought otherwise then you nowe doe yet all this is no sound proofe against you Yes in deed that nowe you holde a Paradox those witnesses are sufficient for that wherevnto may be added the whole Churches iudgement and practize with all the auncient learned Fathers these 1300. or 1400. yeres Chrisostom Epiphanius Naziāzen Hyerom Austen Ambrose c. They all haue thought that vnder the
Prelacie and humane ceremonies men may be true Christians Then these witnesses are sufficient that your deniall hereof is a strange and vnusuall opinion that is a Paradox Finally to trie vs you propound a many of questions But I leaue all this superfluous stuffe to your selfe to be pondered First let vs cleare this present question and your Reasons here about Till then wee haue no leasure to meddle further The Lord of his mercy open your eyes to see your extremitie whereby you doe greatlie hinder not helpe the trueth which you would seeme to suffer for That you may indeed shewe your self as becometh a Christian Pastor not impossible to erre but no louer of error * Not a striueâ— for victorie but a loues of â—â—th 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not regarding your own but the praise of Christ in all things AMEN FINIS A SHORT TREATISE CONCERNING THE TRVENES OF A PASTORALL CALLING IN PASTORS MADE BY PRAELATES Against the Reasons and Obiections of Maister FRANCIS IOHNSON with others of the separation commonly called Brownistes 1599. An Argument shewing the trunes of a Pastorall calling in Pastors made by Prelates Taken from a familiar comparison gathered out of the confessions of Maister Iohnson and others of the separation aforesaid The Argument of Comparison is this AS a couple of ignorant people not contracting but meaning to marry and yet thinking that vnlesse a Priest marry them their marriage is nothing wheras indeed their publique accepting each of other maketh the marriage Now beeing married though “ As themselues hold vnlawfully by a Priest yet their marriage is true and lawfull notwithstanding EVen so a Christian people meaning to haue a sufficient man to their Pastor yet thinking that vnlesse a Prelate doe make him he is no Pastor at all neither can be theirs Notwithstanding he being made a Pastor though “ As they also doe acknowledge vnlawfully by the Prelate yet by their mutuall accepting and ioyning togeather hee is now verely a Pastor yea their Pastor true and lawfull H. IACOB Against the said Argument were brought Seauen Reasons by Maister Iohnson and others which doe hereafter follow togeather with Maister Iacobs Replies to the same REASON I. F. Iohns FIrst infidels idolaters prophane and godles persons may marry togeather with consent and choyse of each other notwithstanding their prophanenes and their marriadge is therein lawfull But it standeth not so with the choyse of Ministers in the Church For 1. prophane and godlesse persons such as these assemblies consist of 2. neuer rightly gathered togeather according to Gods holy ordinance 3. remayning in subiection and bondage to their false and Antichristian officers courts consisting of all sorts of people c. are not capable of chusing or ioyning vnto a true Minister in this estate as infidels may marry in the same estate There fore the comparison will not hould neither is such choice of a Minister by such people lawfull But these assemblies consist of such people c. Ergo c. H. Iacob THe strength of this Reason standeth in these last wordes But these assemblies consist of such people 1. prophane godles persons 2. neuer rightly gathered togither according Gods ordinance 3. remayning in subiection and bondage to their false and Antichristian officers courts Ergo c. These three accusations auaile nothing at all Accusa ∣ tion 1 The first Accusation is from our question for we speake of a Christian people but he of assemblies coÌ„sisting of prophane and godles persons If he say our assemblies all wholy are such That is false If he say some are Of them we speake not If he say in all euery one of our assemblies there are some yea many open prophane and godles persons 1. It is too bold a saying without knowledge to speak so of all 2. If it were true yet it were false to saye our assemblies consist of such or to thinke that whole companies of Christians by such commixtures are made vnholy prophane and godles which is contrary to these scriptures Mat. 23 2 3. Luke 2.21 22. 1.6 Act. 21.23 26. 1 Sam. 2.17 and cap. 1. verse 3.9 Reuel 2.20 21 and 3.1 4. 1 Cor. 3.3 Gal. 3.1 2. 4.11 16. and 5.4.9 Accusa ∣ tion 2 The second Accusation that our assemblies were neuer rightly gathered togeather at the first according to Gods ordinance I denie it especially touching many famous Congregations in the Land where the gospell was not vnknowen before the Queenes commaundiment came to vrge theÌ„ to receyue this doctrine And if the maner of receyuing it then in those hard and doubtfull times and hazardous beginnings were not so perfect nor so exact as should haue bene yet we may see by the example of “ 2 Chro. 30.17 18 19 20. Hezechias and * 2 Chro. 33.15 16 17. Manasses and †Zepha 1.4 5. and 3.1 Ier. 3.6 c. and 4.1 c. and 5.1 c. Iosias reformations That God imputeth it not to such godly and zealous restorers the pillers and ground of the trueth in those dayes If you say the vntaught people then suddenly receyuing the gospell by commandement not by hearing could not beleeue at the first though they professed and therefore at the firste were no true Christians nor Churches I answer 1. Though many receiued the Gospell for the commandements sake yet who can say That nowe they all generally wanted all knowledge and all faith The word then hauing bene in many places taught very many bookes scattered much conference daily consultations and disputations vsed and the blood of the Martirs hauing preached so loud and so lately before 2. It was not so sudden There was “ From Nouember the 17 till Midsomer following more then halfe a yeare for the people to heare learne and consider before the commandement came So that it can not be counted meere force and compulsioÌ„ that at the beginning of our Queenes reigne brought vs to the trueth 3 I would know They condemne not I hope all reformation commanded and compelled by the Magistrate 2 Chro. 34.32 33. and 33.16 and 15.13 Seeing therefore the assemblies thus openly aduisedly submitted to the proclaimed trueth who seeth not but they coÌ„fessed therein their former errors and professed their present faith and vndertooke a newe life from that which before they led though happely not so formallie nor so perfectly as were to haue bene wished Obiection But they receiued all togeather Papistes Atheistes ignorant men all dissolute liuers into one communion and fellowship Answer Indeed all who after this aduizement and notice takeÌ„ submitted to receyued this doctrine these were all receyued in And therefore no open professed Papistes Athistes nor other Heretikes As for ignorant men it is not possible but many will scape among the rest in so great and so generall reformation of a publike state And so questionles it was in Hezechias Manasses and Iosias reformation 2. Chron. which we noted
before The notorious dissolute wicked some were reclaimed all vndertook another profession a new appearance of Christianitie And no doubt the like is to be thought of these as before I obserued touching the ignorant men Now all this was done not intollerablie doubtlesse though I graunt weakely corruptly And very like euen to your owne receiuing into your Church at this time nay more tollerable and more lawfull then yours who to furnish onely one congregation haue receiued many knowne bad men and very ignorant yea and still retaine men full of contention bitter strife 1 Cor. 3.3 In a word this I answer That which disanulleth not a Church gathered and settled That disanulleth it not in the gathering and beginning But such mixtures doe not disanull a Church gathered and setled as appeareth aboue in the scriptures quoted against the First AccusatioÌ„ Mat 23. Luke 2. c. Therfore such mixtures did not disanull our Churches then in their beginning Accusa ∣ tion 3 The Third Accusation is our Assemblies remayne in obedience to the false Antichristian officers c. Let this be our generall sinne yet there is diuersitie of sinnes All are not of like detestation before God nor of like coÌ„sequence against vs. I say not that any sinnes are veniall but I say All sinnes by their nature are mortal yet doe they not al alike abolish vs from Christ nor depriue vs of the glory of God Now this sinne of outward church orders is not of the most heynous nor extreamest disobedience There are sinnes against the * 1 Cor. 15.3 3. 4. RoÌ„ 4.25 1 Cor. 3.10 11 12 13 14. foundation and there are sinnes that stande with the foundation ibid. wherein men liuing and dying ignorantly without perticular repeÌ„tance may be saued Such were the sinnes of the Iewish church and estate in Christes time and after as “ Beza in Acts 15.20 some thinke euen till their Temple and Citie were destroyed though they did personally hate and persecute Christ Such also was the sinne of the auncient declyning Bishops Epiphanius Augustine Chrisostom Leo of Rome c. No lesse was in ours of late Cranmer Ridley Hooper c. in King Edward dayes and no greater is now in ours presently especially touching our Churches Ministers too generally If you say we are all conuicted nowe and sinne against our coÌ„scieÌ„ces as they did not in those times It is vtterly false a palpable vntrueth Whosoeuer knoweth any thing in our church estate generally must needs see it that this poinct touching the Hyerarchy is not acknowledged euen of ignoraÌ„ce in a thousand to one many holding not of the simplest this present gouernement to be th' only true right kinde but all men almost to be indifferent lawful very few indeed scarse to be found that see it to be meerly nought or as you terme it wicked intollerable And in King Edwards time whosoeuer considereth shall finde that the godly learned ProtestaÌ„ts then were not vtterly ignorant of this poinct of reformation and yet sinned not against their conscience in bearing with the times neither were abolished from Christ And surely touching the Iewes they were all generally more conuicted then that Iesus was the Christ then we are now that the Prelacie is of Antichrist yet they remayned a church stil because generally indeed they were not plainly conuicted Thus theÌ„ this our sinne is * See the 2. sortes of fundamental sinnes in the 2. Reply to your 7. Reason before pag. 48. no way fundamentall it destroyeth not faith Christianity in our whole assemblies Therfore they remaine Christian people still as I affirmed not all godles prophane as he vncharitably speaketh O beware of rash and hasty iudging euen of one brother Rom. 14.3 4 13. how much more of such so many whole assemblies professing Christ in EnglaÌ„d Woe be vnto him which curseth where God curseth not Num. 23.8 As also indeed that blesseth where God blesseth not We desire you not to blesse vs in our euil but we warne you not to curse vs in our good which indeed turneth vs not to any furtherance but to a great hinderance and stumbling block stopping vs froÌ„ that sinceritie which els we should dravve nearer vnto Blessed is he that iudgeth wisely that is without affection partialitie euen of him that is despised Better it is and more Christian like euen to offende in too much compassion and patience especially towardes so many hundreth thousands by whom we know nought saue good in this poinct then to offend in too much rigor and seueritie vniust anger Mat. 5. â—2 Howbeit this were not indeed to offend as hath bene aboue shewed And briefly in twoo words thus I conclude it farther that That faith religioÌ„ taught in the booke of Articles published 1562. maketh the people that beleeue and obey the same true Christians such as so liuing and dying may be saued But our Church doeth so holde that faith Therefore they are true Christians The Proposition onely is doubted I had thought none so desperate as to deny it but lately I vnderstand they haue denyed it Howbeit for answer I referre them partly to that which here hath bene said before and especiallie to that which is replied to their Answer in the former Treatise which being well weighed I doubt not but all indifferent and Christian mindes will acknowledge our publique church assemblies in England to be true Christians REASON II. F. Iohns SEcondly the Priest doth not celebrate or pronounce any marriage without the married first giue their consent But the Prelats make Ministers without before the peoples consent Therefore the comparison holdeth not H. Iacob FIrst it is very vaine to make this any matter viz. the peoples coÌ„senting either before or after the Prelats ordeyning For whether before or after it is in nature and value all one They in their ignoraÌ„ce hauing respect only to the Prelats act And if it were so that the Priest should sometymes marie a couple the Maide being meerly enforced and denying consent yet not striuing nor resisting and a while after shall willingly agree and like Out of question there is now true wedlock betweene them Euen so the case is betwixt the Church and the Minister 2. But what will they except here against those Pastors amoÌ„gst vs that were first chosen by the people they first professing their consent and are after instituted inducted by the Praelat Many are thus called amongst vs the most haue the peoples consent euen togeather at their first inducting at least wise they haue soone after by the peoples submitting mainteyning them euen presently 3. Lastly in a word where he saith the Praelats make Ministers without and before the peoples consent We “ Beza in Act 14.23 Fenner against Bridges Pag. 148. affirme that they make not the Pastor at all indeed and in truth but only supposedly It is the Churches consent that maketh him
light of conscience nature togeather wherewith a liuely sauing faith cannot possibly stand Now the Papists in this do departe from the faith also but that is only in some sorte or in parte because they forbid these things not absolutly but vnto some sometimes They that departe thus from the faith may bee true Christians notwithstanding yea they are certenly if they be no worse in any thing els albeit you deny it here most fondly without all sence To which end you most vnlearnedly and vngodly apply those scriptures Scriptures abused A litle leauen leueneth the lump A few dead flyes make the oyntment to stincke and a little poyson bringeth death Will you haue no tainte of euell in a Christian but it quencheth the life of God in vs needes Is it not possible your selues might hold some such errors and yet remayne true Christians notwithstanding Then if Papists were no worse but in those errors only they might be true Christians notwithstanding But Martion and Tatianus doe wholy departe from the faith not but that they beleued some truthes but in that they “ The same did Corah Da than and Abyram likewise See before in answer to the 2. Exception the a Reply presumptuously quenched the instinct of nature conscience as I haue said Here then it appeareth how wicked a sclaunder it is that you say I runne into the Papistes tents and fight with their weapons doe iump with the Remists annotations on 1. Tim. 4.1 2 3. Iudge now by this that I haue said whether I doe or no. And note that I saye that they be either Apostates or departers from the faith not onely who fall totally as you sclaunder me that I saye but also who fall fundamentally that is eyther the first way or second as I haue afore saide And so doe these grosse Heretikes whom you mention 1 Arius Seruetus Papistes c. 2. Martion Tatianus Iudas Corah Balaam the Apostate Israelites c. Thus then your questions and demaundes about the Papistes and their errors I passe by as more vayne then pertinent Onely note withall if this reason of yours were good it maketh Maister Cranmer Ridley c. to be departers from the faith no true Christians Maister IOHNSONS VIII Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON VIII IF the Apostle accoumpted them denyers of the faith and worse then infidels and consequently no true Christians who though they held other truthes of the Gospell yet prouide not for their household Then what will he accoumpt of them who though they professe some truthes of the Gospell yet are not true worshippers of God but execute or submit vnto a false ministerie worship and gouernment ecclesiasticall Which to be th' estate of the Ministerie and people of these assemblies appeareth as aforesaid But the first is true 1 Tim. 5.8 Therefore c. H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 8. Reason THis your Eight Reason is thus much viz. Like as it is for a professor not to prouide for his houshold so is it to hold the Hierarchy c. But that is to deny the faith and to bee worse then an infidel Ergo so are we in England Those very answers to the last Reason doe fully and flatly satisfie this also Either against the Assumption namely that it is not meant simply of denying the faith nor * I meane Fundamentally as in the last Reason before I haue shewed wholy but in this poinct only Or els the propositiō as being meant of such as neglect their families against the light of their consciences and the manifest instinct of nature F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 8. Reason FOr answere of our said Eight Reason he referreth vs to those answers of his to the last Reason which he saith doth fully and flatly ' satisfie this also for the proposition and Assumption But this which he saith we haue in the defence of that Reason declared to be altogeather vntrue Therefore yet we haue receiued no answere either to that Reason or this That thus it standeth we referre the Reader for it vnto that which is said in defence of that Reason aforesaid wishing the Reader moreouer to obserue both there and here in his answer to the Reason following that the power of the truth so preuaileth against them as they cannot but graunt that they departe from and deny the faith in their ministerie worship and gouernement ecclesiasticall as appeareth in their Canons booke of Common prayer Articles Iniunctions persecutions c. All which beeing mentioned vnto them as proofes thereof in these seuerall reasons when now they should defend these particulers if they would maintaine their standing behold they are as mute as a fish therein and not that onely but in their aunswer to the next Reason following graunt vnto vs that in these things we may and ought to separate from them Which is directly to yeeld vs the cause Thus soundly they answer vs and dispute for themselues H. JACOB his 2. Reply to the 8. Reason TO this your Eight Reason and defence thereof I aunswer as before If you take the Apostle to meane such neglecters of their houshold as deny the faith not Fundamentally nor against the instinct of nature but only against conuenient Christian prouidence and no otherwise Then I deny your Assumption If the Apostle meane of such as neglect their families against the light of confcience natures instinct then I deny the Proposition This I say because the Apostle may very well meane both these but in a diuerse measure and proportion of sinne but then this concerneth not vs Euen so as I haue said to your former Reason Note also if this were a true Reason it maketh Maister Cranmer c. denyers of the faith and no true Christians also For maintenance where of you haue here not one poore word at all Touching that you say we cannot deny but graunt that wee departe from and deny the faith in our Ministerie I haue told you how in my answer to your 7. Reason Also see my Replies to your 2. Exception Maister IOHNSONS IX Reason against the former Assumption with Maister IACOBS Replies to the same REASON IX THey which teach othewise and consent not to the wholsome wordes of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the doctrine which is according to godlines are by the rule of the Apostle to be separated from and therefore cannot in that case by the word of God be deemed true Christians 1. Tim. 6.3.4 5. But that so it is with the ministers and people of these assembles in regarde of their ministerie worship and Church constitution appeareth by the Seauentene poincts of false doctrine c. which are already set down and by the proofes before alleadged out of their own cannons Articles Iniunctions c. Therefore the Ministers and people of these assemblies in regard of their ministerie worship and Church constitution are by the rule of the